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.
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Summary
Today’s daf is sponsored by Lisa Elon in honor of her steadfast chevruta, Rhondda May, “May G-d grant us many more years of great learning together. “
Today’s daf is sponsored by Rachel Alexander Levy in memory of Jack Schuster, father of my chevruta, Rabbi Jordi Schuster. May his memory be for a blessing.
Today’s daf is sponsored by Adam Dicker in honor of Carolyn Hochstadter Dicker on her birthday.
There is a debate between Rav and Shmuel regarding the kashering process known as niguv. In one version of the debate, Rav requires that ashes be used once during the process, while Shmuel requires them to be used twice. In another version, there is no actual disagreement—Rav simply omits the final step of rinsing with water, since its sole purpose is to remove the ashes. Shmuel, however, includes it as part of the process.
How are wicker nets in a winepress kashered? Rabbi Avahu derives from the laws of purifying wicker nets that they require niguv. If the nets are made of reeds, which are more absorbent, they must be left unused for twelve months—or, according to Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, until the next wine-making season. What is the practical difference between these two opinions? Rabbi Yossi offers an alternative to waiting a year: pouring boiling water over them. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel cites Rabbi Yossi, suggesting instead that the nets be placed under running water for an onah. What is an onah? Some define it as either a day or a night, while others say it means twelve hours. Rav Shmuel bar Yitzchak explains that both interpretations ultimately mean the same thing. How?
The strainer and baskets used in the winepress are kashered differently depending on the material they are made from, since the level of absorption varies.
If grape clusters are placed in the winepress and surrounded by the juice from the grapes, are they considered a single unit for the purposes of impurity? This has practical implications: if an am haaretz—someone who may not be trusted regarding purity laws—touches one cluster, does that render all the surrounding clusters impure?
If one purchases utensils from a non-Jew, how are they to be kashered? The method depends on how the utensil was used: if used with cold food, rinse with water; if used with hot water, perform hagala (boiling); and if exposed to direct fire, apply libun (burning with fire). A knife must be polished. All these utensils also require tevila—immersion in a mikveh. Two different phrases in Bamidbar 31:23, following the battle with Midian, are cited to derive the requirement for tevila. Why are both phrases needed? Rav Nachman explains that even new utensils purchased from a non-Jew require tevila, since kashered old utensils are considered equivalent to new ones. Borrowed utensils from a non-Jew do not require tevila, but a question arises regarding utensils given to a Jew as collateral.
Metal and glass utensils require tevila, but earthenware does not. If an earthenware vessel is coated with a lead glaze, should it be treated as earthenware or as metal?
If utensils were used without being kashered, is food prepared in them forbidden? The answer depends on when the vessel was last used and whether one holds that a substance imparting a bad flavor is permitted or prohibited.
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.
Avodah Zarah 75
רַב אָמַר: בְּמַיִם, וְהוּא הַדִּין לְאֵפֶר. רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר: לְאֵפֶר, וְהוּא הַדִּין לְמַיִם, וְלָא פְּלִיגִי — הָא בְּרַטִּיבְתָּא, הָא בְּיַבִּשְׁתָּא.
Rav says: One must cleanse it with water first, and the same must be done with ashes subsequently, and Rabba bar bar Ḥana says: One must cleanse it with ashes first, and the same must be done with water subsequently. The Gemara comments: And they do not disagree. This statement, that it must be cleansed first with ashes and subsequently with water, was stated with regard to a damp winepress. That statement, that first it must be moistened with water and then cleansed with ashes, was stated with regard to a dry winepress.
אִיתְּמַר בֵּי רַב מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב אָמְרִי: תַּרְתֵּי תְּלָת, וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: תְּלָת אַרְבַּע.
A dispute was stated with regard to this matter: The Sages of the school of Rav say in the name of Rav that the cleansing process consists of two stages for a damp winepress, namely, ashes and water, and three stages for a dry winepress, namely, water, ashes, and water. And Shmuel says that it consists of three stages for a damp winepress, namely, ashes, water, and ashes, and four stages for a dry winepress, namely, water, ashes, water, and ashes.
בְּסוּרָא מַתְנוּ הָכִי, בְּפוּמְבְּדִיתָא מַתְנוּ: בֵּי רַב אָמְרִי מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב: תְּלָת אַרְבַּע, וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: אַרְבַּע חָמֵשׁ.
In Sura they taught the dispute in this preceding manner, but in Pumbedita they taught it in the following manner: The Sages of the school of Rav said in the name of Rav that the cleansing process consists of three stages for a damp winepress, namely, ashes, water, and ashes, and four stages for a dry winepress, namely, water, ashes, water, and ashes. And Shmuel says that it consists of four stages for a damp winepress, namely, ashes, water, ashes, and water, and five stages for a dry winepress, namely, water, ashes, water, ashes, and water.
וְלָא פְּלִיגִי, מָר קָא חָשֵׁיב מַיָּא בָּתְרָאֵי, וּמָר לָא קָחָשֵׁיב מַיָּא בָּתְרָאֵי.
The Gemara comments with regard to the latter version of the dispute: And they do not actually disagree. One Sage, Shmuel, counts the last rinsing with water, which is only in order to remove the ashes, and the other Sage, Rav, does not count the last rinsing with water. Therefore Rav counts three and four stages, whereas Shmuel counts four and five.
בְּעוֹ מִינֵּיהּ מֵרַבִּי אֲבָהוּ: הָנֵי גּוּרְגֵּי דַּאֲרַמָּאֵי מַאי?
§ The students asked Rabbi Abbahu with regard to a similar issue of cleansing a utensil from wine of gentiles: With regard to those wicker nets [gorgei] used to hold the grapes during the treading, which belong to gentiles, what is the way to cleanse them?
אֲמַר לְהוּ רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ: תְּנֵיתוּהָ, הֲרֵי שֶׁהָיוּ גִּתָּיו וּבֵית בַּדָּיו טְמֵאִין, וּבִקֵּשׁ לַעֲשׂוֹתָן בְּטָהֳרָה — הַדַּפִּין וְהָעֲדָשִׁין וְהַלּוּלָבִין מַדִּיחָן, וְהָעֲקָלִין שֶׁל נְצָרִין וְשֶׁל בִּצְבּוּץ מְנַגְּבָן, וְשֶׁל שִׁיפָה וְשֶׁל גֶּמִי מְיַשְּׁנָן שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: מַנִּיחָן מִגַּת לְגַת וּמִבַּד לְבַד.
Rabbi Abbahu said to them: You learned this in a baraita: In the case of one whose winepresses or olive presses were impure, and he wished to prepare his grapes and olives in a state of purity, he must first cleanse the presses from the impure produce for which they were used. He must rinse the planks used as a frame in the winepress, and the troughs, and the twigs used as brooms in the winepress; and he must cleanse the pressing baskets with ashes and water if they were made of palm leaves or of hemp [bitzbutz], or leave them dormant twelve months if they were made of bulrush or of reeds, because these absorb more of the wine. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: He may leave them dormant from one wine-pressing season to the next wine-pressing season, or from one olive-pressing season to the next olive-pressing season.
הַיְינוּ תַּנָּא קַמָּא! אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ: חוֹרְפֵי וְאַפְלֵי.
The Gemara interjects: Isn’t this opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel the same as that of the first tanna, as twelve months pass from one wine-pressing season to the next? The Gemara responds: The difference between them is with regard to early-ripening grapes and late-ripening grapes. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel does not require a precise measure of twelve months, as the lapse between ripening seasons may be greater or less.
רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: הָרוֹצֶה לְטַהֲרָן מִיָּד, מַגְעִילָן בְּרוֹתְחִין, אוֹ חוֹלְטָן בְּמֵי זֵיתִים. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: מַנִּיחָן תַּחַת צִינּוֹר שֶׁמֵּימָיו מְקַלְּחִין, אוֹ בְּמַעְיָן שֶׁמֵּימָיו רוֹדְפִין. וְכַמָּה? עוֹנָה.
The baraita continues: Rabbi Yosei says: One who wishes to purify the winepress or olive press immediately without waiting a year can purge them by pouring boiling water over them, or scald them in water used for cooking olives. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says in the name of Rabbi Yosei: He can place them under a pipe whose water flows constantly or in a spring with rapid waters. And for how long should he leave them there? He should leave them for an interval of time, as the Gemara will explain.
כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁאָמְרוּ בְּיֵין נֶסֶךְ, כָּךְ אָמְרוּ בִּטְהָרוֹת.
The baraita adds: In the same way that the Sages stated these cleansing instructions with regard to a winepress used for libation wine, so they stated these instructions with regard to matters of purity.
כְּלַפֵּי לְיָיא! בִּטְהָרוֹת קָיְימִינַן! אֶלָּא, כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁאָמְרוּ בִּטְהָרוֹת, כָּךְ אָמְרוּ בְּיֵין נֶסֶךְ.
The Gemara asks with regard to this last clause: Isn’t it the opposite? We are dealing in this baraita with matters of purity, not with the matter of wine used for a libation. Rather, the baraita should be emended: In the same way that the Sages stated this with regard to matters of purity, so they stated this with regard to libation wine.
כַּמָּה עוֹנָה? אָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אוֹ יוֹם אוֹ לַיְלָה. רַבִּי חָנָא שְׁאִינָה, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ רַבִּי חָנָא בַּר שְׁאִינָה, אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: חֲצִי יוֹם וַחֲצִי לַיְלָה.
The Gemara asks: How long is an interval of time? Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: It is either an entire day or an entire night. Rabbi Ḥana Sha’ina, and some say Rabbi Ḥana bar Sha’ina, says that Rabba bar bar Ḥana says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: It is half a day and half a night.
אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר יִצְחָק: וְלָא פְּלִיגִי, הָא בִּתְקוּפַת נִיסָן וְתִשְׁרִי, הָא בִּתְקוּפַת תַּמּוּז וְטֵבֵת.
Rabbi Shmuel bar Yitzḥak says: And they do not disagree. This statement, that it is either a day or a night, is referring to the season of Nisan or Tishrei, i.e., the fall or spring, when the day and the night are of equal length, and that statement, that it is half a day and half a night, is referring to the season of Tammuz or Tevet, i.e., the summer or winter, when they are not equal, and so twelve hours are measured by half the day and half the night.
אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: הָנֵי רְוָוקֵי דַּאֲרַמָּאֵי דְּמַזְיָא — מַדִּיחָן, דְּעַמְרָא — מְנַגְּבָן, דְּכִיתָּנָא — מְיַשְּׁנָן, וְאִי אִיכָּא קִטְרֵי — שָׁרֵי לְהוּ. הָנֵי דִּקוּלֵי וְחַלָּאתָא דַּאֲרַמָּאֵי דְּחַיְטִי בְּחַבְלֵי דְּצוּרֵי — מְדִיחָן,
§ Rav Yehuda says: In order to cleanse those gentiles’ straining bags [ravukei], which are used for straining yeast from wine, with regard to those made of hair, which is not absorbent, one may rinse them. With regard to those made of wool, one must cleanse them with ashes and water. With regard to those made of flax, which is more absorbent, one must leave them dormant. And if there are knots, one must undo them. In order to cleanse those gentiles’ baskets and strainers, with regard to those that are plaited from palm strips, one may rinse them.
דְּצַבְתָּא — לְנַגְּבָן, דְּכִיתָּנָא — מְיַשְּׁנָן, וְאִי אִית בְּהוּ קִיטְרֵי — שָׁרֵי לְהוּ.
With regard to those that are plaited from tzavta, one must cleanse them with ashes and water. With regard to those that are plaited from flax, one must leave them dormant. And if they have knots, one must undo them.
אִיתְּמַר: עַם הָאָרֶץ שֶׁהוֹשִׁיט יָדוֹ לַגַּת וְנָגַע בְּאֶשְׁכּוֹלוֹת, רַבִּי וְרַבִּי חִיָּיא — חַד אָמַר: אֶשְׁכּוֹל וְכׇל סְבִיבוֹתָיו טְמֵאִין, וְכׇל הַגַּת כּוּלָּהּ טְהוֹרָה; וְחַד אָמַר: כׇּל הַגַּת כּוּלָּהּ נָמֵי טְמֵאָה.
§ The Gemara discusses another aspect of the purity of a winepress. It was stated: In the case of one who is unreliable with regard to ritual impurity [am ha’aretz] who reached his hand into the winepress and touched grape clusters that were lying in the wine, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and Rabbi Ḥiyya disagree. One says that the cluster he touched and all its surroundings are rendered impure, but the rest of the entire winepress is pure, and one says that the rest of the entire winepress is also rendered impure, as the entire winepress is considered connected due to the wine in it.
וּלְמַאן דְּאָמַר: אֶשְׁכּוֹל וְכׇל סְבִיבוֹתָיו טְמֵאִים, וְכׇל הַגַּת כּוּלָּהּ טְהוֹרָה, מַאי שְׁנָא מֵהָא דִּתְנַן: שֶׁרֶץ שֶׁנִּמְצָא בָּרֵחַיִם אֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא אֶלָּא מְקוֹם מַגָּעוֹ, וְאִם הָיָה מַשְׁקִין מְהַלֵּךְ — הַכֹּל טָמֵא?
The Gemara asks: And according to the one who says that the cluster and all its surroundings are impure but the rest of the entire winepress is pure, in what way is this case different from that which we learned in a mishna (Teharot 9:8): The carcass of a creeping animal that was found in an oil press transmits impurity to the place it touched alone, but if there was liquid flowing in the mill, it is all rendered impure? Why is it not the halakha in the case of the winepress as well that the entire winepress is impure due to the liquid in it?
הָתָם לָא מַפְסֵק וְלָא מִידֵּי, הָכָא מַפְסְקִי אֶשְׁכּוֹלוֹת.
The Gemara answers: There, in the case of the oil press, there is nothing that interrupts the flow of the liquid, and therefore the liquid connects everything to render it impure. Here, the clusters of grapes interrupt the flow of the wine, and so there is no uninterrupted connection between all of the wine in the winepress.
אוֹרוֹ לֵיהּ רַבָּנַן לְרַבִּי יִרְמְיָה, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ לִבְרֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יִרְמְיָה, כְּדִבְרֵי הָאוֹמֵר: אֶשְׁכּוֹל וְכׇל סְבִיבוֹתָיו טְמֵאִין, וְכׇל הַגַּת כּוּלָּהּ טְהוֹרָה.
The Sages taught Rabbi Yirmeya, and some say they taught the son of Rabbi Yirmeya, in accordance with the statement of the one who says: The cluster and all its surroundings are impure, but the entire winepress is pure.
מַתְנִי׳ הַלּוֹקֵחַ כְּלֵי תַּשְׁמִישׁ מִן הַגּוֹיִם, אֶת שֶׁדַּרְכּוֹ לְהַטְבִּיל — יַטְבִּיל, לְהַגְעִיל — יַגְעִיל, לְלַבֵּן בָּאוּר — יְלַבֵּן בָּאוּר. הַשַּׁפּוּד וְהָאַסְכָּלָא — מְלַבְּנָן בָּאוּר, הַסַּכִּין — שָׁפָהּ וְהִיא טְהוֹרָה.
MISHNA: One who purchases cooking utensils from the gentiles must prepare them for use by Jews in the following manner: With regard to those utensils whose manner of preparation is to immerse them in a ritual bath, as they require no further preparation, he must immerse them accordingly. With regard to those utensils whose manner of preparation is to purge them with boiling water, as those utensils are used with boiling water, e.g., pots, he must purge them accordingly. With regard to those whose manner of preparation is to heat until white-hot in the fire, as they are used for grilling, he must heat them until white-hot in the fire. Therefore, with regard to the spit [hashappud] and the grill [veha’askela], he must heat them until white-hot in the fire. With regard to the knife, he must polish it and it is rendered pure.
גְּמָ׳ תָּנָא: וְכוּלָּן צְרִיכִין טְבִילָה בְּאַרְבָּעִים סְאָה. מְנָהָנֵי מִילֵּי? אָמַר רָבָא, דְּאָמַר קְרָא: ״כׇּל דָּבָר אֲשֶׁר יָבֹא בָאֵשׁ תַּעֲבִירוּ בָאֵשׁ וְטָהֵר״, הוֹסִיף לְךָ הַכָּתוּב טׇהֳרָה אַחֶרֶת.
GEMARA: The Sages taught: And they all require immersion in forty se’a of water, including utensils that must first be purged in boiling water or heated until white-hot. The Gemara asks: From where is this matter derived? Rava says: It is derived from that which the verse states with regard to utensils captured in the battle against the Midianites: “Anything that may tolerate the fire, you shall make to go through the fire, and it shall be pure” (Numbers 31:23). By stating: “And it shall be pure,” the verse added to the process another required act of purification in addition to heating the utensil with fire, which is understood to be immersion.
תָּנֵי בַּר קַפָּרָא: מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״בְּמֵי נִדָּה״, שׁוֹמֵעַ אֲנִי שֶׁצָּרִיךְ הַזָּאָה שְׁלִישִׁי וּשְׁבִיעִי, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״אַךְ״ — חָלַק.
Bar Kappara teaches an additional source for this halakha: From that which is stated in the continuation of the verse: “Nevertheless it shall be purified with the water of sprinkling [nidda],” I would derive that the utensils require sprinkling of purification water on the third and the seventh day of their purification process, as is the halakha in the case of one who is impure with impurity imparted by a corpse. Therefore, the verse states “nevertheless,” indicating that the Torah makes a distinction in this case, and that sprinkling on the third and seventh day are not required.
אִם כֵּן, מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״בְּמֵי נִדָּה״? מַיִם שֶׁנִּדָּה טוֹבֶלֶת בָּהֶן, הֱוֵי אוֹמֵר: אַרְבָּעִים סְאָה.
If that is so, what is the meaning when the verse states: “With the water of sprinkling [nidda]”? Clearly, the term nidda is referring not to sprinkling but to a menstruating woman, who is also called a nidda. Accordingly, the verse means that the utensils must be immersed in water in which a menstruating woman can immerse in order to become pure; and you must say that this is referring to a ritual bath that contains forty se’a of water.
אִיצְטְרִיךְ לְמִיכְתַּב ״וְטָהֵר״, וְאִיצְטְרִיךְ לְמִיכְתַּב ״בְּמֵי נִדָּה״. אִי כְּתַב ״וְטָהֵר״, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא ״וְטָהֵר״ כֹּל דְּהוּ, כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״בְּמֵי נִדָּה״.
The Gemara explains that both sources for this halakha are necessary: It was necessary for the Torah to write “and it shall be pure,” and it was necessary for the Torah to write “with the water of sprinkling,” because if the Torah had written only “and it shall be pure,” I would say that the verse means: “And it shall be pure” by immersion in any amount of water. Therefore the Merciful One writes: “With the water of sprinkling.”
וְאִי כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא בְּמֵי נִדָּה, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא הֶעֱרֵב שֶׁמֶשׁ כְּנִדָּה, כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״וְטָהֵר״ לְאַלְתַּר.
And if the Merciful One had written only “with the water of sprinkling,” I would say that the process requires the setting of the sun, as is the halakha with regard to a menstruating woman, whose immersion renders her pure only after sunset. Therefore, the Merciful One writes: “And it shall be pure,” indicating that the utensils can be purified immediately.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ: אֲפִילּוּ כֵּלִים חֲדָשִׁים בַּמַּשְׁמָע, דְּהָא יְשָׁנִים וְלִיבְּנָן כַּחֲדָשִׁים דָּמוּ, וַאֲפִילּוּ הָכִי בָּעֵי טְבִילָה. מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב שֵׁשֶׁת: אִי הָכִי, אֲפִילּוּ זוּזָא דְּסַרְבָּלָא נָמֵי! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: כְּלֵי סְעוּדָה אֲמוּרִין בַּפָּרָשָׁה.
§ Rav Naḥman says that Rabba bar Avuh says: Even new utensils that were never used that are bought from gentiles are meant to be included in the requirement of immersion, as old utensils that one heated until white-hot are similar to new utensils, as they do not contain the flavor of non-kosher food, and nevertheless they require immersion. Rav Sheshet objects to this: If so, then even scissors for cutting clothing [zuza desarbela] should require immersion as well. Rav Naḥman said to him: Only utensils used in the preparation of meals are mentioned in the passage in the Torah, and only those require immersion.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא בִּלְקוּחִין, וּכְמַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁהָיָה, אֲבָל שְׁאוּלִין — לָא.
Rav Naḥman says that Rabba bar Avuh says: The Sages taught this only with regard to utensils that were purchased from gentiles and are therefore comparable to the utensils mentioned in the incident that was related in the passage; but the requirement does not apply to borrowed utensils.
רַב יִצְחָק בַּר יוֹסֵף זְבַן מָנָא דְּמַרְדָּא מִגּוֹי, סְבַר לְהַטְבִּילָהּ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ הָהוּא מֵרַבָּנַן וְרַבִּי יַעֲקֹב שְׁמֵיהּ: לְדִידִי מִפָּרְשָׁא לֵיהּ מִינֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: כְּלֵי מַתָּכוֹת אֲמוּרִין בַּפָּרָשָׁה.
Rav Yitzḥak bar Yosef bought a utensil of marda, a mixture of earth and dung, from a gentile. He thought he was required to immerse it. One of the Sages, and Rabbi Ya’akov was his name, said to him: It was explained to me personally by Rabbi Yoḥanan himself that this requirement applies to metal utensils alone, as those are the utensils mentioned in the passage.
אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: הָנֵי כְּלֵי זְכוּכִית, הוֹאִיל וְכִי נִשְׁתַּבְּרוּ יֵשׁ לָהֶן תַּקָּנָה, כִּכְלֵי מַתָּכוֹת דָּמוּ. קוּנְיָא, פְּלִיגִי בַּהּ רַב אַחָא וְרָבִינָא, חַד אָמַר: כִּתְחִלָּתוֹ, וְחַד אָמַר: כְּסוֹפוֹ, וְהִלְכְתָא כְּסוֹפוֹ.
Rav Ashi says: With regard to those glass utensils, since when broken they can be fixed, i.e., remade, if one melts them down and fashions the material into new utensils, they are similar to metal utensils and also require immersion. With regard to lead-glazed earthenware utensils, Rav Aḥa and Ravina disagree. One says: The halakha is in accordance with its initial state; since it was initially an earthenware utensil, it does not require immersion. And one says: The halakha is in accordance with its ultimate state; since it is coated with metal, it requires immersion. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is in accordance with its ultimate state.
אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: מַשְׁכַּנְתָּא מַאי? אָמַר מָר בַּר רַב אָשֵׁי: אַבָּא מַשְׁכֵּן לֵיהּ גּוֹי כָּסָא דְּכַסְפָּא, וְאַטְבְּלֵיהּ וְאִישְׁתִּי בֵּיהּ, וְלָא יָדַעְנָא אִי מִשּׁוּם דְקָסָבַר מַשְׁכַּנְתָּא כִּזְבִינֵי דָּמְיָא, אִי מִשּׁוּם דְּחָזֵי לְגוֹי דְּדַעְתֵּיהּ לְשַׁקּוֹעֵיהּ.
A dilemma was raised before the Sages: If a Jew is holding a gentile’s utensil as collateral, what is the halakha? Is he required to immerse it or not? Mar bar Rav Ashi said: A gentile once gave my father a silver goblet as collateral, and he immersed it and drank from it. But I do not know whether this was because he maintained that possessing a utensil as collateral is considered like a purchase, or because he saw that the gentile’s intention was to leave it with him, and therefore he considered it as his own.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: הַלּוֹקֵחַ כְּלֵי תַּשְׁמִישׁ מִן הַגּוֹיִם, דְּבָרִים שֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן — מַטְבִּילָן וְהֵן טְהוֹרִין. דְּבָרִים שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן עַל יְדֵי צוֹנֵן, כְּגוֹן כּוֹסוֹת וְקִתּוֹנִיּוֹת וּצְלוֹחִיּוֹת — מַדִּיחָן וּמַטְבִּילָן וְהֵם טְהוֹרִין. דְּבָרִים שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן עַל יְדֵי חַמִּין, כְּגוֹן הַיּוֹרוֹת הַקּוּמְקְמוֹסִין וּמְחַמֵּי חַמִּין — מַגְעִילָן וּמַטְבִּילָן וְהֵן טְהוֹרִין. דְּבָרִים שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן עַל יְדֵי הָאוּר, כְּגוֹן הַשַּׁפּוּדִין וְהָאַסְכְּלָאוֹת — מְלַבְּנָן וּמַטְבִּילָן וְהֵן טְהוֹרִין.
§ The Sages taught: One who purchases utensils from the gentiles must prepare them for use in the following manner: With regard to items that the gentile did not use, one immerses them, and they are pure. With regard to items that the gentile used for cold food or drink, such as cups and jugs and flasks, one rinses them and immerses them, and they are pure. With regard to items that the gentile used for hot food or drink, such as large pots, small kettles [hakumkamusun], and samovars, one purges them with boiling water and immerses them, and they are pure. With regard to items that the gentile used with fire, such as spits and grills, one heats them until white-hot and immerses them, and they are pure.
וְכוּלָּן שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן עַד שֶׁלֹּא יַטְבִּיל וְשֶׁלֹּא יַגְעִיל וְשֶׁלֹּא יְלַבֵּן, תָּנֵי חֲדָא: אָסוּר, וְתַנְיָא אִידַּךְ: מוּתָּר.
And with regard to all utensils that one used before immersing and purging and heating them until white-hot, it is taught in one baraita that the food prepared with them is forbidden, and it is taught in another baraita that the food prepared with them is permitted.
לָא קַשְׁיָא, הָא כְּמַאן דְּאָמַר: נוֹתֵן טַעַם לִפְגָם — אָסוּר, הָא כְּמַאן דְּאָמַר: נוֹתֵן טַעַם לִפְגָם — מוּתָּר.
The Gemara explains: This contradiction is not difficult. This ruling, that the food prepared with such utensils is forbidden, is according to the one who says that if a forbidden substance imparts flavor to a permitted food to the detriment of the mixture, the permitted food is forbidden. That ruling, that the food prepared with such utensils is permitted, is according to the one who says that if a forbidden substance imparts flavor to a permitted food to the detriment of the mixture, it remains permitted. Here too, since the flavor of non-kosher food imparted by the utensil detracts from the flavor of the food, such food is permitted.
וּלְמַאן דְּאָמַר: נוֹתֵן טַעַם לִפְגָם — מוּתָּר, גִּיעוּלֵי גוֹיִם דְּאָסַר רַחֲמָנָא הֵיכִי מַשְׁכַּחַתְּ לַהּ?
The Gemara asks: But according to the one who says that that if a forbidden substance imparts flavor to a permitted food to the detriment of the mixture then the mixture is permitted, with regard to utensils of gentiles that require purging, which the Merciful One renders forbidden until they are purged, how can you find these circumstances when it is actually prohibited to use the utensils until they are purged? Since utensils impart a detrimental flavor to food that is cooked in them, there seems to be no reason not to use utensils of gentiles without purging them.
אָמַר רַב חִיָּיא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב הוּנָא: לֹא אָסְרָה תּוֹרָה אֶלָּא קְדֵירָה
Rav Ḥiyya, son of Rav Huna, says: The Torah renders forbidden only a pot
Delve Deeper
Broaden your understanding of the topics on this daf with classes and podcasts from top women Talmud scholars.
Din & Daf: How Should We Understand the Central Role of Blood in the World of Korbanot?
A Daf Of Their Own –Intent and Action
כוונה ומעשה בקורבנות- דף משלהן
האם חייבים לתת צדקה? ולחזור בתשובה?
תשובה אמיתית: מתי היא מתקבלת? ואיך יודעים שהיא נענתה?
Din & Daf: What is the Concept of שלא לשמה All About?
Horayot Daf 2-8 – Daf Yomi: One Week at a Time
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.
In January 2020, my teaching partner at IDC suggested we do daf yomi. Thanks to her challenge, I started learning daily from Rabbanit Michelle. It’s a joy to be part of the Hadran community. (It’s also a tikkun: in 7th grade, my best friend and I tied for first place in a citywide gemara exam, but we weren’t invited to the celebration because girls weren’t supposed to be learning gemara).
Jerusalem, Israel
I was inspired to start learning after attending the 2020 siyum in Binyanei Hauma. It has been a great experience for me. It’s amazing to see the origins of stories I’ve heard and rituals I’ve participated in my whole life. Even when I don’t understand the daf itself, I believe that the commitment to learning every day is valuable and has multiple benefits. And there will be another daf tomorrow!
Jerusalem, Israel
I learned daf more off than on 40 years ago. At the beginning of the current cycle, I decided to commit to learning daf regularly. Having Rabanit Michelle available as a learning partner has been amazing. Sometimes I learn with Hadran, sometimes with my husband, and sometimes on my own. It’s been fun to be part of an extended learning community.
Honolulu, Hawaii, United States
I started learning daf yomi at the beginning of this cycle. As the pandemic evolved, it’s been so helpful to me to have this discipline every morning to listen to the daf podcast after I’ve read the daf; learning about the relationships between the rabbis and the ways they were constructing our Jewish religion after the destruction of the Temple. I’m grateful to be on this journey!
Teaneck NJ, United States
I started learning Daf in Jan 2020 with Brachot b/c I had never seen the Jewish people united around something so positive, and I wanted to be a part of it. Also, I wanted to broaden my background in Torah Shebal Peh- Maayanot gave me a great gemara education, but I knew that I could hold a conversation in most parts of tanach but almost no TSB. I’m so thankful for Daf and have gained immensely.
NJ, United States
My Daf journey began in August 2012 after participating in the Siyum Hashas where I was blessed as an “enabler” of others. Galvanized into my own learning I recited the Hadran on Shas in January 2020 with Rabbanit Michelle. That Siyum was a highlight in my life. Now, on round two, Daf has become my spiritual anchor to which I attribute manifold blessings.
Englewood NJ, United States
Blacksburg, 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.
Raanana, Israel
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!
California, United States
I started learning at the beginning of this Daf Yomi cycle because I heard a lot about the previous cycle coming to an end and thought it would be a good thing to start doing. My husband had already bought several of the Koren Talmud Bavli books and they were just sitting on the shelf, not being used, so here was an opportunity to start using them and find out exactly what was in them. Loving it!
Borehamwood, United Kingdom
Palo Alto, CA, United States
I started learning Dec 2019 after reading “If all the Seas Were Ink”. I found
Daily daf sessions of Rabbanit Michelle in her house teaching, I then heard about the siyum and a new cycle starting wow I am in! Afternoon here in Sydney, my family and friends know this is my sacred time to hide away to live zoom and learn. Often it’s hard to absorb and relate then a gem shines touching my heart.
Dover Heights, Australia
I started learning Gemara at the Yeshivah of Flatbush. And I resumed ‘ברוך ה decades later with Rabbanit Michele at Hadran. I started from Brachot and have had an exciting, rewarding experience throughout seder Moed!
Maale Adumim, Israel
Attending the Siyyum in Jerusalem 26 months ago inspired me to become part of this community of learners. So many aspects of Jewish life have been illuminated by what we have learned in Seder Moed. My day is not complete without daf Yomi. I am so grateful to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Community.
Newton, United States
I started Daf during the pandemic. I listened to a number of podcasts by various Rebbeim until one day, I discovered Rabbanit Farbers podcast. Subsequently I joined the Hadran family in Eruvin. Not the easiest place to begin, Rabbanit Farber made it all understandable and fun. The online live group has bonded together and have really become a supportive, encouraging family.
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Raanana, Israel
I began learning with Rabbanit Michelle’s wonderful Talmud Skills class on Pesachim, which really enriched my Pesach seder, and I have been learning Daf Yomi off and on over the past year. Because I’m relatively new at this, there is a “chiddush” for me every time I learn, and the knowledge and insights of the group members add so much to my experience. I feel very lucky to be a part of this.
Karmiel, Israel
Since I started in January of 2020, Daf Yomi has changed my life. It connects me to Jews all over the world, especially learned women. It makes cooking, gardening, and folding laundry into acts of Torah study. Daf Yomi enables me to participate in a conversation with and about our heritage that has been going on for more than 2000 years.
Skokie, IL, United States
I started my Daf Yomi journey at the beginning of the COVID19 pandemic.
Los Angeles, United States
A Gemara shiur previous to the Hadran Siyum, was the impetus to attend it.It was highly inspirational and I was smitten. The message for me was התלמוד בידינו. I had decided along with my Chahsmonaim group to to do the daf and take it one daf at time- without any expectations at all. There has been a wealth of information, insights and halachik ideas. It is truly exercise of the mind, heart & Soul
Hashmonaim, Israel
Avodah Zarah 75
רַב אָמַר: בְּמַיִם, וְהוּא הַדִּין לְאֵפֶר. רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר: לְאֵפֶר, וְהוּא הַדִּין לְמַיִם, וְלָא פְּלִיגִי — הָא בְּרַטִּיבְתָּא, הָא בְּיַבִּשְׁתָּא.
Rav says: One must cleanse it with water first, and the same must be done with ashes subsequently, and Rabba bar bar Ḥana says: One must cleanse it with ashes first, and the same must be done with water subsequently. The Gemara comments: And they do not disagree. This statement, that it must be cleansed first with ashes and subsequently with water, was stated with regard to a damp winepress. That statement, that first it must be moistened with water and then cleansed with ashes, was stated with regard to a dry winepress.
אִיתְּמַר בֵּי רַב מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב אָמְרִי: תַּרְתֵּי תְּלָת, וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: תְּלָת אַרְבַּע.
A dispute was stated with regard to this matter: The Sages of the school of Rav say in the name of Rav that the cleansing process consists of two stages for a damp winepress, namely, ashes and water, and three stages for a dry winepress, namely, water, ashes, and water. And Shmuel says that it consists of three stages for a damp winepress, namely, ashes, water, and ashes, and four stages for a dry winepress, namely, water, ashes, water, and ashes.
בְּסוּרָא מַתְנוּ הָכִי, בְּפוּמְבְּדִיתָא מַתְנוּ: בֵּי רַב אָמְרִי מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב: תְּלָת אַרְבַּע, וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: אַרְבַּע חָמֵשׁ.
In Sura they taught the dispute in this preceding manner, but in Pumbedita they taught it in the following manner: The Sages of the school of Rav said in the name of Rav that the cleansing process consists of three stages for a damp winepress, namely, ashes, water, and ashes, and four stages for a dry winepress, namely, water, ashes, water, and ashes. And Shmuel says that it consists of four stages for a damp winepress, namely, ashes, water, ashes, and water, and five stages for a dry winepress, namely, water, ashes, water, ashes, and water.
וְלָא פְּלִיגִי, מָר קָא חָשֵׁיב מַיָּא בָּתְרָאֵי, וּמָר לָא קָחָשֵׁיב מַיָּא בָּתְרָאֵי.
The Gemara comments with regard to the latter version of the dispute: And they do not actually disagree. One Sage, Shmuel, counts the last rinsing with water, which is only in order to remove the ashes, and the other Sage, Rav, does not count the last rinsing with water. Therefore Rav counts three and four stages, whereas Shmuel counts four and five.
בְּעוֹ מִינֵּיהּ מֵרַבִּי אֲבָהוּ: הָנֵי גּוּרְגֵּי דַּאֲרַמָּאֵי מַאי?
§ The students asked Rabbi Abbahu with regard to a similar issue of cleansing a utensil from wine of gentiles: With regard to those wicker nets [gorgei] used to hold the grapes during the treading, which belong to gentiles, what is the way to cleanse them?
אֲמַר לְהוּ רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ: תְּנֵיתוּהָ, הֲרֵי שֶׁהָיוּ גִּתָּיו וּבֵית בַּדָּיו טְמֵאִין, וּבִקֵּשׁ לַעֲשׂוֹתָן בְּטָהֳרָה — הַדַּפִּין וְהָעֲדָשִׁין וְהַלּוּלָבִין מַדִּיחָן, וְהָעֲקָלִין שֶׁל נְצָרִין וְשֶׁל בִּצְבּוּץ מְנַגְּבָן, וְשֶׁל שִׁיפָה וְשֶׁל גֶּמִי מְיַשְּׁנָן שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: מַנִּיחָן מִגַּת לְגַת וּמִבַּד לְבַד.
Rabbi Abbahu said to them: You learned this in a baraita: In the case of one whose winepresses or olive presses were impure, and he wished to prepare his grapes and olives in a state of purity, he must first cleanse the presses from the impure produce for which they were used. He must rinse the planks used as a frame in the winepress, and the troughs, and the twigs used as brooms in the winepress; and he must cleanse the pressing baskets with ashes and water if they were made of palm leaves or of hemp [bitzbutz], or leave them dormant twelve months if they were made of bulrush or of reeds, because these absorb more of the wine. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: He may leave them dormant from one wine-pressing season to the next wine-pressing season, or from one olive-pressing season to the next olive-pressing season.
הַיְינוּ תַּנָּא קַמָּא! אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ: חוֹרְפֵי וְאַפְלֵי.
The Gemara interjects: Isn’t this opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel the same as that of the first tanna, as twelve months pass from one wine-pressing season to the next? The Gemara responds: The difference between them is with regard to early-ripening grapes and late-ripening grapes. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel does not require a precise measure of twelve months, as the lapse between ripening seasons may be greater or less.
רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: הָרוֹצֶה לְטַהֲרָן מִיָּד, מַגְעִילָן בְּרוֹתְחִין, אוֹ חוֹלְטָן בְּמֵי זֵיתִים. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: מַנִּיחָן תַּחַת צִינּוֹר שֶׁמֵּימָיו מְקַלְּחִין, אוֹ בְּמַעְיָן שֶׁמֵּימָיו רוֹדְפִין. וְכַמָּה? עוֹנָה.
The baraita continues: Rabbi Yosei says: One who wishes to purify the winepress or olive press immediately without waiting a year can purge them by pouring boiling water over them, or scald them in water used for cooking olives. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says in the name of Rabbi Yosei: He can place them under a pipe whose water flows constantly or in a spring with rapid waters. And for how long should he leave them there? He should leave them for an interval of time, as the Gemara will explain.
כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁאָמְרוּ בְּיֵין נֶסֶךְ, כָּךְ אָמְרוּ בִּטְהָרוֹת.
The baraita adds: In the same way that the Sages stated these cleansing instructions with regard to a winepress used for libation wine, so they stated these instructions with regard to matters of purity.
כְּלַפֵּי לְיָיא! בִּטְהָרוֹת קָיְימִינַן! אֶלָּא, כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁאָמְרוּ בִּטְהָרוֹת, כָּךְ אָמְרוּ בְּיֵין נֶסֶךְ.
The Gemara asks with regard to this last clause: Isn’t it the opposite? We are dealing in this baraita with matters of purity, not with the matter of wine used for a libation. Rather, the baraita should be emended: In the same way that the Sages stated this with regard to matters of purity, so they stated this with regard to libation wine.
כַּמָּה עוֹנָה? אָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אוֹ יוֹם אוֹ לַיְלָה. רַבִּי חָנָא שְׁאִינָה, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ רַבִּי חָנָא בַּר שְׁאִינָה, אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: חֲצִי יוֹם וַחֲצִי לַיְלָה.
The Gemara asks: How long is an interval of time? Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: It is either an entire day or an entire night. Rabbi Ḥana Sha’ina, and some say Rabbi Ḥana bar Sha’ina, says that Rabba bar bar Ḥana says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: It is half a day and half a night.
אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר יִצְחָק: וְלָא פְּלִיגִי, הָא בִּתְקוּפַת נִיסָן וְתִשְׁרִי, הָא בִּתְקוּפַת תַּמּוּז וְטֵבֵת.
Rabbi Shmuel bar Yitzḥak says: And they do not disagree. This statement, that it is either a day or a night, is referring to the season of Nisan or Tishrei, i.e., the fall or spring, when the day and the night are of equal length, and that statement, that it is half a day and half a night, is referring to the season of Tammuz or Tevet, i.e., the summer or winter, when they are not equal, and so twelve hours are measured by half the day and half the night.
אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: הָנֵי רְוָוקֵי דַּאֲרַמָּאֵי דְּמַזְיָא — מַדִּיחָן, דְּעַמְרָא — מְנַגְּבָן, דְּכִיתָּנָא — מְיַשְּׁנָן, וְאִי אִיכָּא קִטְרֵי — שָׁרֵי לְהוּ. הָנֵי דִּקוּלֵי וְחַלָּאתָא דַּאֲרַמָּאֵי דְּחַיְטִי בְּחַבְלֵי דְּצוּרֵי — מְדִיחָן,
§ Rav Yehuda says: In order to cleanse those gentiles’ straining bags [ravukei], which are used for straining yeast from wine, with regard to those made of hair, which is not absorbent, one may rinse them. With regard to those made of wool, one must cleanse them with ashes and water. With regard to those made of flax, which is more absorbent, one must leave them dormant. And if there are knots, one must undo them. In order to cleanse those gentiles’ baskets and strainers, with regard to those that are plaited from palm strips, one may rinse them.
דְּצַבְתָּא — לְנַגְּבָן, דְּכִיתָּנָא — מְיַשְּׁנָן, וְאִי אִית בְּהוּ קִיטְרֵי — שָׁרֵי לְהוּ.
With regard to those that are plaited from tzavta, one must cleanse them with ashes and water. With regard to those that are plaited from flax, one must leave them dormant. And if they have knots, one must undo them.
אִיתְּמַר: עַם הָאָרֶץ שֶׁהוֹשִׁיט יָדוֹ לַגַּת וְנָגַע בְּאֶשְׁכּוֹלוֹת, רַבִּי וְרַבִּי חִיָּיא — חַד אָמַר: אֶשְׁכּוֹל וְכׇל סְבִיבוֹתָיו טְמֵאִין, וְכׇל הַגַּת כּוּלָּהּ טְהוֹרָה; וְחַד אָמַר: כׇּל הַגַּת כּוּלָּהּ נָמֵי טְמֵאָה.
§ The Gemara discusses another aspect of the purity of a winepress. It was stated: In the case of one who is unreliable with regard to ritual impurity [am ha’aretz] who reached his hand into the winepress and touched grape clusters that were lying in the wine, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and Rabbi Ḥiyya disagree. One says that the cluster he touched and all its surroundings are rendered impure, but the rest of the entire winepress is pure, and one says that the rest of the entire winepress is also rendered impure, as the entire winepress is considered connected due to the wine in it.
וּלְמַאן דְּאָמַר: אֶשְׁכּוֹל וְכׇל סְבִיבוֹתָיו טְמֵאִים, וְכׇל הַגַּת כּוּלָּהּ טְהוֹרָה, מַאי שְׁנָא מֵהָא דִּתְנַן: שֶׁרֶץ שֶׁנִּמְצָא בָּרֵחַיִם אֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא אֶלָּא מְקוֹם מַגָּעוֹ, וְאִם הָיָה מַשְׁקִין מְהַלֵּךְ — הַכֹּל טָמֵא?
The Gemara asks: And according to the one who says that the cluster and all its surroundings are impure but the rest of the entire winepress is pure, in what way is this case different from that which we learned in a mishna (Teharot 9:8): The carcass of a creeping animal that was found in an oil press transmits impurity to the place it touched alone, but if there was liquid flowing in the mill, it is all rendered impure? Why is it not the halakha in the case of the winepress as well that the entire winepress is impure due to the liquid in it?
הָתָם לָא מַפְסֵק וְלָא מִידֵּי, הָכָא מַפְסְקִי אֶשְׁכּוֹלוֹת.
The Gemara answers: There, in the case of the oil press, there is nothing that interrupts the flow of the liquid, and therefore the liquid connects everything to render it impure. Here, the clusters of grapes interrupt the flow of the wine, and so there is no uninterrupted connection between all of the wine in the winepress.
אוֹרוֹ לֵיהּ רַבָּנַן לְרַבִּי יִרְמְיָה, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ לִבְרֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יִרְמְיָה, כְּדִבְרֵי הָאוֹמֵר: אֶשְׁכּוֹל וְכׇל סְבִיבוֹתָיו טְמֵאִין, וְכׇל הַגַּת כּוּלָּהּ טְהוֹרָה.
The Sages taught Rabbi Yirmeya, and some say they taught the son of Rabbi Yirmeya, in accordance with the statement of the one who says: The cluster and all its surroundings are impure, but the entire winepress is pure.
מַתְנִי׳ הַלּוֹקֵחַ כְּלֵי תַּשְׁמִישׁ מִן הַגּוֹיִם, אֶת שֶׁדַּרְכּוֹ לְהַטְבִּיל — יַטְבִּיל, לְהַגְעִיל — יַגְעִיל, לְלַבֵּן בָּאוּר — יְלַבֵּן בָּאוּר. הַשַּׁפּוּד וְהָאַסְכָּלָא — מְלַבְּנָן בָּאוּר, הַסַּכִּין — שָׁפָהּ וְהִיא טְהוֹרָה.
MISHNA: One who purchases cooking utensils from the gentiles must prepare them for use by Jews in the following manner: With regard to those utensils whose manner of preparation is to immerse them in a ritual bath, as they require no further preparation, he must immerse them accordingly. With regard to those utensils whose manner of preparation is to purge them with boiling water, as those utensils are used with boiling water, e.g., pots, he must purge them accordingly. With regard to those whose manner of preparation is to heat until white-hot in the fire, as they are used for grilling, he must heat them until white-hot in the fire. Therefore, with regard to the spit [hashappud] and the grill [veha’askela], he must heat them until white-hot in the fire. With regard to the knife, he must polish it and it is rendered pure.
גְּמָ׳ תָּנָא: וְכוּלָּן צְרִיכִין טְבִילָה בְּאַרְבָּעִים סְאָה. מְנָהָנֵי מִילֵּי? אָמַר רָבָא, דְּאָמַר קְרָא: ״כׇּל דָּבָר אֲשֶׁר יָבֹא בָאֵשׁ תַּעֲבִירוּ בָאֵשׁ וְטָהֵר״, הוֹסִיף לְךָ הַכָּתוּב טׇהֳרָה אַחֶרֶת.
GEMARA: The Sages taught: And they all require immersion in forty se’a of water, including utensils that must first be purged in boiling water or heated until white-hot. The Gemara asks: From where is this matter derived? Rava says: It is derived from that which the verse states with regard to utensils captured in the battle against the Midianites: “Anything that may tolerate the fire, you shall make to go through the fire, and it shall be pure” (Numbers 31:23). By stating: “And it shall be pure,” the verse added to the process another required act of purification in addition to heating the utensil with fire, which is understood to be immersion.
תָּנֵי בַּר קַפָּרָא: מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״בְּמֵי נִדָּה״, שׁוֹמֵעַ אֲנִי שֶׁצָּרִיךְ הַזָּאָה שְׁלִישִׁי וּשְׁבִיעִי, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״אַךְ״ — חָלַק.
Bar Kappara teaches an additional source for this halakha: From that which is stated in the continuation of the verse: “Nevertheless it shall be purified with the water of sprinkling [nidda],” I would derive that the utensils require sprinkling of purification water on the third and the seventh day of their purification process, as is the halakha in the case of one who is impure with impurity imparted by a corpse. Therefore, the verse states “nevertheless,” indicating that the Torah makes a distinction in this case, and that sprinkling on the third and seventh day are not required.
אִם כֵּן, מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״בְּמֵי נִדָּה״? מַיִם שֶׁנִּדָּה טוֹבֶלֶת בָּהֶן, הֱוֵי אוֹמֵר: אַרְבָּעִים סְאָה.
If that is so, what is the meaning when the verse states: “With the water of sprinkling [nidda]”? Clearly, the term nidda is referring not to sprinkling but to a menstruating woman, who is also called a nidda. Accordingly, the verse means that the utensils must be immersed in water in which a menstruating woman can immerse in order to become pure; and you must say that this is referring to a ritual bath that contains forty se’a of water.
אִיצְטְרִיךְ לְמִיכְתַּב ״וְטָהֵר״, וְאִיצְטְרִיךְ לְמִיכְתַּב ״בְּמֵי נִדָּה״. אִי כְּתַב ״וְטָהֵר״, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא ״וְטָהֵר״ כֹּל דְּהוּ, כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״בְּמֵי נִדָּה״.
The Gemara explains that both sources for this halakha are necessary: It was necessary for the Torah to write “and it shall be pure,” and it was necessary for the Torah to write “with the water of sprinkling,” because if the Torah had written only “and it shall be pure,” I would say that the verse means: “And it shall be pure” by immersion in any amount of water. Therefore the Merciful One writes: “With the water of sprinkling.”
וְאִי כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא בְּמֵי נִדָּה, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא הֶעֱרֵב שֶׁמֶשׁ כְּנִדָּה, כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״וְטָהֵר״ לְאַלְתַּר.
And if the Merciful One had written only “with the water of sprinkling,” I would say that the process requires the setting of the sun, as is the halakha with regard to a menstruating woman, whose immersion renders her pure only after sunset. Therefore, the Merciful One writes: “And it shall be pure,” indicating that the utensils can be purified immediately.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ: אֲפִילּוּ כֵּלִים חֲדָשִׁים בַּמַּשְׁמָע, דְּהָא יְשָׁנִים וְלִיבְּנָן כַּחֲדָשִׁים דָּמוּ, וַאֲפִילּוּ הָכִי בָּעֵי טְבִילָה. מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב שֵׁשֶׁת: אִי הָכִי, אֲפִילּוּ זוּזָא דְּסַרְבָּלָא נָמֵי! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: כְּלֵי סְעוּדָה אֲמוּרִין בַּפָּרָשָׁה.
§ Rav Naḥman says that Rabba bar Avuh says: Even new utensils that were never used that are bought from gentiles are meant to be included in the requirement of immersion, as old utensils that one heated until white-hot are similar to new utensils, as they do not contain the flavor of non-kosher food, and nevertheless they require immersion. Rav Sheshet objects to this: If so, then even scissors for cutting clothing [zuza desarbela] should require immersion as well. Rav Naḥman said to him: Only utensils used in the preparation of meals are mentioned in the passage in the Torah, and only those require immersion.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא בִּלְקוּחִין, וּכְמַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁהָיָה, אֲבָל שְׁאוּלִין — לָא.
Rav Naḥman says that Rabba bar Avuh says: The Sages taught this only with regard to utensils that were purchased from gentiles and are therefore comparable to the utensils mentioned in the incident that was related in the passage; but the requirement does not apply to borrowed utensils.
רַב יִצְחָק בַּר יוֹסֵף זְבַן מָנָא דְּמַרְדָּא מִגּוֹי, סְבַר לְהַטְבִּילָהּ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ הָהוּא מֵרַבָּנַן וְרַבִּי יַעֲקֹב שְׁמֵיהּ: לְדִידִי מִפָּרְשָׁא לֵיהּ מִינֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: כְּלֵי מַתָּכוֹת אֲמוּרִין בַּפָּרָשָׁה.
Rav Yitzḥak bar Yosef bought a utensil of marda, a mixture of earth and dung, from a gentile. He thought he was required to immerse it. One of the Sages, and Rabbi Ya’akov was his name, said to him: It was explained to me personally by Rabbi Yoḥanan himself that this requirement applies to metal utensils alone, as those are the utensils mentioned in the passage.
אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: הָנֵי כְּלֵי זְכוּכִית, הוֹאִיל וְכִי נִשְׁתַּבְּרוּ יֵשׁ לָהֶן תַּקָּנָה, כִּכְלֵי מַתָּכוֹת דָּמוּ. קוּנְיָא, פְּלִיגִי בַּהּ רַב אַחָא וְרָבִינָא, חַד אָמַר: כִּתְחִלָּתוֹ, וְחַד אָמַר: כְּסוֹפוֹ, וְהִלְכְתָא כְּסוֹפוֹ.
Rav Ashi says: With regard to those glass utensils, since when broken they can be fixed, i.e., remade, if one melts them down and fashions the material into new utensils, they are similar to metal utensils and also require immersion. With regard to lead-glazed earthenware utensils, Rav Aḥa and Ravina disagree. One says: The halakha is in accordance with its initial state; since it was initially an earthenware utensil, it does not require immersion. And one says: The halakha is in accordance with its ultimate state; since it is coated with metal, it requires immersion. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is in accordance with its ultimate state.
אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: מַשְׁכַּנְתָּא מַאי? אָמַר מָר בַּר רַב אָשֵׁי: אַבָּא מַשְׁכֵּן לֵיהּ גּוֹי כָּסָא דְּכַסְפָּא, וְאַטְבְּלֵיהּ וְאִישְׁתִּי בֵּיהּ, וְלָא יָדַעְנָא אִי מִשּׁוּם דְקָסָבַר מַשְׁכַּנְתָּא כִּזְבִינֵי דָּמְיָא, אִי מִשּׁוּם דְּחָזֵי לְגוֹי דְּדַעְתֵּיהּ לְשַׁקּוֹעֵיהּ.
A dilemma was raised before the Sages: If a Jew is holding a gentile’s utensil as collateral, what is the halakha? Is he required to immerse it or not? Mar bar Rav Ashi said: A gentile once gave my father a silver goblet as collateral, and he immersed it and drank from it. But I do not know whether this was because he maintained that possessing a utensil as collateral is considered like a purchase, or because he saw that the gentile’s intention was to leave it with him, and therefore he considered it as his own.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: הַלּוֹקֵחַ כְּלֵי תַּשְׁמִישׁ מִן הַגּוֹיִם, דְּבָרִים שֶׁלֹּא נִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן — מַטְבִּילָן וְהֵן טְהוֹרִין. דְּבָרִים שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן עַל יְדֵי צוֹנֵן, כְּגוֹן כּוֹסוֹת וְקִתּוֹנִיּוֹת וּצְלוֹחִיּוֹת — מַדִּיחָן וּמַטְבִּילָן וְהֵם טְהוֹרִין. דְּבָרִים שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן עַל יְדֵי חַמִּין, כְּגוֹן הַיּוֹרוֹת הַקּוּמְקְמוֹסִין וּמְחַמֵּי חַמִּין — מַגְעִילָן וּמַטְבִּילָן וְהֵן טְהוֹרִין. דְּבָרִים שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן עַל יְדֵי הָאוּר, כְּגוֹן הַשַּׁפּוּדִין וְהָאַסְכְּלָאוֹת — מְלַבְּנָן וּמַטְבִּילָן וְהֵן טְהוֹרִין.
§ The Sages taught: One who purchases utensils from the gentiles must prepare them for use in the following manner: With regard to items that the gentile did not use, one immerses them, and they are pure. With regard to items that the gentile used for cold food or drink, such as cups and jugs and flasks, one rinses them and immerses them, and they are pure. With regard to items that the gentile used for hot food or drink, such as large pots, small kettles [hakumkamusun], and samovars, one purges them with boiling water and immerses them, and they are pure. With regard to items that the gentile used with fire, such as spits and grills, one heats them until white-hot and immerses them, and they are pure.
וְכוּלָּן שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן עַד שֶׁלֹּא יַטְבִּיל וְשֶׁלֹּא יַגְעִיל וְשֶׁלֹּא יְלַבֵּן, תָּנֵי חֲדָא: אָסוּר, וְתַנְיָא אִידַּךְ: מוּתָּר.
And with regard to all utensils that one used before immersing and purging and heating them until white-hot, it is taught in one baraita that the food prepared with them is forbidden, and it is taught in another baraita that the food prepared with them is permitted.
לָא קַשְׁיָא, הָא כְּמַאן דְּאָמַר: נוֹתֵן טַעַם לִפְגָם — אָסוּר, הָא כְּמַאן דְּאָמַר: נוֹתֵן טַעַם לִפְגָם — מוּתָּר.
The Gemara explains: This contradiction is not difficult. This ruling, that the food prepared with such utensils is forbidden, is according to the one who says that if a forbidden substance imparts flavor to a permitted food to the detriment of the mixture, the permitted food is forbidden. That ruling, that the food prepared with such utensils is permitted, is according to the one who says that if a forbidden substance imparts flavor to a permitted food to the detriment of the mixture, it remains permitted. Here too, since the flavor of non-kosher food imparted by the utensil detracts from the flavor of the food, such food is permitted.
וּלְמַאן דְּאָמַר: נוֹתֵן טַעַם לִפְגָם — מוּתָּר, גִּיעוּלֵי גוֹיִם דְּאָסַר רַחֲמָנָא הֵיכִי מַשְׁכַּחַתְּ לַהּ?
The Gemara asks: But according to the one who says that that if a forbidden substance imparts flavor to a permitted food to the detriment of the mixture then the mixture is permitted, with regard to utensils of gentiles that require purging, which the Merciful One renders forbidden until they are purged, how can you find these circumstances when it is actually prohibited to use the utensils until they are purged? Since utensils impart a detrimental flavor to food that is cooked in them, there seems to be no reason not to use utensils of gentiles without purging them.
אָמַר רַב חִיָּיא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב הוּנָא: לֹא אָסְרָה תּוֹרָה אֶלָּא קְדֵירָה
Rav Ḥiyya, son of Rav Huna, says: The Torah renders forbidden only a pot
