Iying¹wxt¹lretd¹z@¹Xkeyd

IYING¹WXT¹LRETD¹Z@¹XKEYD

])8U| vO)[{Nz8[(T{C)[{Nz8.wTwSRLxLzD)2yU ])8U| vOOxU)5|G]wC[xN)9|G :@¹DPYN¹¹fol. 44c )[{Nz8P)Z{QzOP)Z{2yQ.wTwSRLxLOw:]LyD{JLyO[xDvUvG)O[|Q{Cw:Ly5O|UV|C]w[wJ|CG{NC{OzQ)2yU [{<(Q Mishnah 1: If somebody hires a worker to work for him on libation wine, his wages are forbidden1. If he hired him for other work, even though he told him, transport an amphora of libation wine for me from one place to another, his wages are permitted2.

1 If a Gentile hires a Jewish worker fact that libation wine is forbidden for specifically to work on his wine, the wages usufruct for a Jewish owner. are forbidden to the worker for all usufruct. 2 The moment that libation wine was not The rule which makes it impossible for the mentioned at the time of the hiring, there is Jewish worker to be hired in this way is no obligation on the worker to refrain from purely rabbinical; it is not implied by the being occupied with libation wine. i¦A¦x m¥W§a EdÄ©` i¦A¦x .Fl o¥zFp Èd Fx¨k§U `Ÿl§e .'lek l¥rFRd © z¤` x¥kFVd © :@¹DKLD (44c line 50) .EdEq¨p§w q¨p§w .o¨p¨gFi zFxi¥t§A .`xi ¨r§ ¦ f i¦A¦x x©n¨` .zi¦ria§ ¦ U o¨x¨k§U zi¦ria§ ¦ X©A oi¦UFrdÎl¨ ¨ k§e mit¨ ¦ Y©M©d§emi¦ xÖ©g©d .i¥P©Y x¨k¨W oi¦l§hFp Ed§i `ŸNW ¤ i`©P©i i¦A¦x zi¥a§C oi¥Ni¦`§l o¨p¨gFi i¦A¦x i¥xFdc § ì¦d©d§e .`¨zi¦p§z©n ìd ¦ x¥zid ¥ d¨x¨f d¨cFa£r zFxi¥t§A .i©li¦i iA¦ ¦ x x©n¨` .oFd§li¥ xFd dï§n¤g§p i¦A¦x§kE dcEd§i ¨ i¦A¦x§M zFr¨n `¨N¤` o¦i©i o¤dici ¥ A ¦ .EdEq¨p§w q¨p§w K¤q¤p o¦i©i§A .o¨p¨gFi i¦A¦x m¥W§a EdÄ©` i¦A¦x x©n¨c§M .`¨zi¦p§z©n ì¦d Halakhah 1: “If somebody hires a worker,” etc. Does he not give him his wages? Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Johanan: They fined him a fine3. 4It was stated5: “The wages of donkey drivers, carriers, and all those working with Sabbatical produce are sabbatical.6” Rebbi Zeìra said, this baraita deals with permitted produce. And what Rebbi Johanan taught those of the House of Rebbi Yannai that they should not accept in their hands7 wine as wages but money, he taught them following Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Nehemiah8. Rebbi Ilai said, this baraita deals with idolatrous produce9. As HALAKHAH 1 439

Rebbi Abbahu said in the name of Rebbi Johanan, in matters of libation wine they fined him a fine.

3 A customary restriction without both Ševiìt mss. There is no question why justification in law. one should be paid in wine for using an 4 This paragraph is a shortened and olive press. somewhat corrupt copy of one in Ševiìt 8:6, 8 Who in Ševiìt (8:4 Note 69, Tosephta Notes 94-98. 6:21) forbid to pay for anything, even for 5 Babli 62a, Tosephta Ševiìt 6:26. food, with sabbatical produce. 6 They should only be used to buy 9 This reading is quite impossible; Sabbatical produce to be eaten, not idolatrous produce does not exist. In Ševiìt: processed. “forbidden produce”, stored sabbatical 7 While the paragraph in general looks produce at a time when wild animals no like a bad copy of the one in Ševiìt, the longer can find produce on the fields, which reading odicia “in their hands” is superior to has to be consumed immediately. the reading odica “of their olive presses” of

.Fx¨k§U¦A r©w§x©w Fl o©z¨p .Fx¨k§U i¥c§M c©r Fzi¦a¨g§a Fq§pFw Y©§ ` zi¦a¨g§A zi¦a¨g FOr ¦ s¥YiM ¦ (44c line 56) .xn¨ ©` Y©§` x¨z¨`Îl¨k§A .Fx¨k§U¦a d¨n¥d§a Fl o©z¨p .xq¡ ©`¤p `¨kë .xq¡ ©`¤p r©w§x©w oi¥` .x©n¨` Y©§` x¨z¨`Îl¨k§A i¥c§M c©r `¨N¤` xEq¨` lŸM©d Fx¨k§U¦A lŸM©d Fl o©z¨p .xq¡ ©`¤p `¨kë .x©q¡`¤p mi¦I©g gEx© FAwW¥I¤W xä¨C oi¥` .Fx¨k§U i¥c§M c©r ei¨q¨k§P¦n FpM§ § W©n§n Y©§` d¨`¨p£d z©aFha § FOr ¦ d¤UFr dï¨d .Fx¨k§U d¤f i¥` c¨g¤` K¤x¤¤k§A i¦pi¥W§e oi¦lEg x¥kFn dï¨d .x¥zid§ ¥A mFi iv£ ¦ g©e xEQi`§ ¦ A mFi iv£ ¦ g FOr ¦ d¤UFr dï¨d o¦i©i ì¦a¨d§l l¥rFRd © z¤` x¥kFVd © .`¨c¨d o¦n D¨pir§ ¦ O§W¦p .o¥k `¨k¨d§e .d¤U£r©i i¦pi¥W§e .d¤U£r©i oi¦lEg d¤v§x¦I¤W d¤lFg©l o¦i©i .Fl xn¨ ©` m¦` lä£` .Fl o¥Yi¦l aïig © oi¥` e`¨l m¦`§e .Fl o¥Yi¦l aïig © Fl ìa¥ ¦ d m¦` .d¤lFg©l ei¨l§b©x i¥n§C .Fl o¥Yi¦l aïig © ì¦a¥d `Ÿl oi¥a ì¦a¥d oi¥A .i¦pFlR § mFwÖ¦n d¤lFg©l gER© z§ ©e i¦pFl§R mFwÖ¦n .Fl o¥zFp ei¨l§b©x i¥n§c `Ÿl `¨kë .Fl ozFp ¥ .xEq¨` Fx¨k§U o¥k Elit£ ¦ ` .K¤q¤p o¦i©i§N¤W zFI¦a¨g x¥A©W¨l Fx¨k§U .i¥rä dï§n§x¦i i¦A¦x If he transported for him amphora against amphora10, you fine him in his own amphora up to the amount of his wages11. If he paid him his wages in land. Everywhere you are saying that land is not forbidden12, here it is forbidden. If he paid him his wages in an animal. Everywhere you are saying that anything breathing is not forbidden13, here it is forbidden. If he gave him anything as his wages14, is everything forbidden or only up to the amount of his wages? If he worked for him for goodwill, do you impound his property in the value of his wages? 440 AVODAH ZARAH CHAPTER FIVE

If he worked for him half a day in prohibition and half a day in permission. If he was selling profane [food] and Second Tithe together, [the buyer] has the choice of treating as profane what he chooses and as Second Tithe what he chooses15. Is this the same here? Let us hear from the following16. If somebody hires a worker to bring wine to a sick person; if he delivered [the employer] has to pay him, otherwise he does not have to pay him. But if he told him, wine for a sick person from place X, an apple for a sick person from place X, whether or not he delivered he has to pay him, for he pays the wages of his feet. And here, does he not pay the wages of his feet17? Rebbi Jeremiah asked, if he hired him to break amphoras of libation wine; is it forbidden anyhow18?

10 The language is not clear and the noted. While it is necessary to “give a proposed interpretations are unfounded. It name” to the Second Tithe due for a harvest, seems that the worker is not paid as a it is not necessary bodily to separate it from worker for his time but as a contractor by the remainder of the harvest. If the farmer the piece, and is not paid in money but does not intend to bring his tithe bodily to receives an (empty) amphora. Jerusalem, he may sell it and transfer its In the entire paragraph it is equally sanctity to the money. The buyer then has possible not to read the sentences as to separate tithe from profane food but is not apodictic statements but as questions. If he restricted in his choice; cf. Introduction to is paid in land, is the land forbidden? Etc. Tractate Ma`aser Šeni. 11 That he might be forced to sell the 16 Ševi`it 8:4 Note 65. In the first case the amphora and destroy coins in the equivalent worker is hired as a contractor, in the second of his wages. as a worker who has to be paid for his time. 12 Halakhah 3:6, Note 125. 17 There is no reason to impound the 13 Halakhah 3:6, Note 140. wages for the time he worked in a permitted 14 Which clearly is worth more than the way. amount due for his wages. 18 In the Babli 63b the question was asked 15 This statement is not found in any by Amoraim of the second generation and parallel source but no opposing opinion is answered in the negative.

.xn¨ ©` o¨z¨pFi i¦A¦x .iFB c©i§a d¨x¨f d¨cFa£r i¥n§C .xEq¨` iFB c©i§A K¤q¤p o¦i©i i¥n§C .x©n¨` i¦Q©` (44c line 70) `¨zi¦p§z©n .oic§l ¥ d¨r§ii©q§n `¨zi¦p§z©nE oic§l ¥ d¨r§ii©q§n `¨zi¦p§z©n .xEq¨` .x©n¨` o¨p¨gFi i¦A¦x .xŸEn K¤q¤p o¦i©i xFM§n¤`¤W c©r o¥Y§n©d .Fl xn`Ÿi © `Ÿl .l`¨ ¥x§U¦i§l zFr¨n aïig © dï¨d¤W iFB .o¨p¨gFi i¦A¦x§l d¨r§ii©q§n HALAKHAH 1 441 iFB .o¨z¨pFi i¦A¦x§l d¨r§ii©q§n `¨zi¦p§z©n .si¦l¡g¤d `Ö¤W .x¥nF` i¥p£` .K¨l o¤z¤`ë d¨x¨f d¨cFa£r xFMn¤ § `¤W c©r zir§ ¦ x©n i¥p§R¦n .Fl ozFp ¥ e § d¨x¨f d¨cFa£r .Fl ozFp ¥ e § j¤q¤p o¦i©i x¥kFn d¤f i¥x£d l¥`¨x§U¦i§l zFr¨n aïig © dï¨d¤W .oi¦i©r¨d i¦A¦x z¤wFl£g©n .d¨pi¦p£g i¦A¦x x©n¨` .Ed¨n oi¦Ri¦l£g i¥Ri¦l£g .zFxEq£`¤W oi¦Ri¦l£g©A oi¦cFn lŸM©d o¤A x¨f§r«¨l iA¦ ¦ x .xŸEn .ix§ ¥n«¨` o¦pÄ©x§e .xEq¨` .x©n¨` i¥qFi i¦A¦xi¥A l`¥r¨n§W¦i i¦A¦x .o¦pÄ©x§e l`¥r¨n§W¦i i`n © .EdFn¨k d¤f i¥x£d EPO¦ ¤ n Fn§ii©w§l lFkï Y©§ `¤WÎl¨M .EdFn¨M m¤x†¥g zi¬¦i¨¨ d§e o¦pÄ©x§C oFn£r©H .dï§r©WFd d¨nE`§ †n L§²c«ï§A w¯©A§c¦iÎ`«Ÿle § m¥W l©r m¦n¨r§R 'a EdFn¨M EdFn¨M .oEA iA¦ ¦ xi¥A i¥qFi i¦A¦x x©n¨` .oFc§k .m¤x®¥g©dÎon ¦ Assi said, the proceeds of libation wine in the hands of a Gentile are prohibited19. The proceeds of an idol in the hand of a Gentile, Rebbi Jonathan said it is permitted, Rebbi Johanan said it is prohibited. A baraita supports one and a baraita supports the other. A baraita supports Rebbi Johanan: “A Gentile who owed money to a Jew should not tell him, wait until I sell libation wine, until I sell an idol, and I shall give it to you. I am saying, maybe he exchanged.20” A baraita supports Rebbi Jonathan: “A Gentile who owes money to a Jew may sell libation wine and give to him, an idol and give to him. Because of the bad impression?21” 22Everybody agrees that substitutes are forbidden. What about substitutes of substitutes? Rebbi Hanina said, a disagreement between Rebbi Ismael and the rabbis. Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose said, forbidden. But the rabbis say, permitted. Rebbi Eleazar ben Hoshaia, the reason of the rabbis, you would be banned like itself23. Anything which you can keep from it is like itself24. What about it? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Bun said, like itself, like itself two times25, because of nothing should cling to your hand from the ban26.

19 They are not forbidden to the Gentile, the proof texts wine and idols are always only to a Jew who knows that this money treated in parallel. On the other hand, the was received as payment for wine whose preceding text (Notes 11-12) notes that the usufruct is forbidden to Jews. From the prohibition of wine, a purely rabbinic argument in the text it seems possible that custom, follows much stricter rules than the one should read; “Assi said, the proceeds of biblical prohibition of idols. libation wine in the hands of a Gentile and 20 Babli 64a. If the Gentile tells the Jew the proceeds of an idol in the hand of a that he gives him money received for Gentile, Rebbi Jonathan said it is permitted, forbidden wine or idols, the Jew may not Rebbi Johanan said it is prohibited”, since in accept since we must assume that the 442 AVODAH ZARAH CHAPTER FIVE

Gentile tells the truth. In the Babli’s the idol itself. tradition, this is accepted by everybody; in 23 Deut. 7:26. the Yerushalmi this is particular to R. 24 Any proceeds are like the idol itself. Johanan. But nothing is said about proceeds for barter 21 This is read as meaning that in all cases of the proceeds. the Jew may accept the money and does not 25 The expression EdFn¨M m¤x¤g appears only have to worry that people will say that he once in the biblical text. The argument accepts idol money. The Babli would gives the reason for R. Ismael ben R. Yose’s interpret the baraita as stating that the Jew position. If the proceeds obtained by barter may accept the money as long as the Gentile for an idol are an idol, then the proceeds in does not explicitly declare it as idol’s barter for the proceeds are also an idol; in proceeds. effect, the prohibition never stops. 22 The entire paragraph has a parallel in 26 Deut. 13:18. the Babli, 54b. Anything received in barter for an idol must be destroyed as if it were

Dx:LxO'[{ {Nz8[(T{C'{[{Nz8.wTwSRLxL{GLwO{UCLyD{GzO[)QvJ|G]wC[xN)8|G :A¹DPYN (fol. 44c) [{<(Q '{[{Nz8{GLwO{U)SLyE{O|JLy3yGw:Ly5O|UV|C{GLwO{U Mishnah 2: If somebody27 hires a donkey to transport libation wine, its wages are forbidden. If he hired it to sit on it, even though he put his barrel28 on it, its wages are permitted.

27 A Gentile. The Mishnah is parallel to 28 Greek ȜȐȖȣȞȠȢ, ȜȐȖȘȞȠȢ, Latin lagena Mishnah 1; only rentals made for the “bottle”, also a measure. Middle High explicit purpose of transporting libation German lâgen “small barrel; a measure of wine (or idols) is forbidden, not occasional volume or weight”. use if the hiring was for general purposes.

.ciR§ ¦ w©n xFn£g©d `¥d§i `ŸN¤W ic§ ¥M c©r .o¨kid ¥ c©r .'lek xFn£g©d z¤` x¥kFUd © :A¹DKLD (44d line 5) Halakhah 2: “If somebody hires a donkey,” etc. How far? Up to when the donkey takes offense29.

29 If the weight of the rider and the barrel donkey, the contract would be for would be more than the normal load of a transporting the wine and illegal. HALAKHAH 3 443

])U{7(DzQ(L{GPyCzH])[{<(QRxGzHPxJLFzL y PLyD{SvULx$|%O|UO|W{3w:.wTwSRyL|L :B¹ DPYN (fol. 44c) O|U.wTwSRyL|LOw:]),yD{J([z$|

30 If the taste of the forbidden wine fell. improves the taste of the food on which it 32 In the Halakhah both here and in the fell. Babli (67a) R. Johanan restricts this to wine 31 If the spill was accidental, it is not falling on a dish of hot broken beans or necessary that the wine actually diminish the peas. value or enjoyment of the food on which it lä£` .o¨n¨zFg l¥C§l©Ci¦p `ŸNW§ ¤ A oi¦zi¦p§z©n .'lek mia¨ ¦ p£r i¥A©B l©r l©t¨P¤W K¤q¤p o¦i©i :B¹DKLD (44d line 7) .od ¥ zFrTEa ¨ n¦ § M o¨n¨zFg l¥C§l©Ci¦p .xEq¨` lŸM©d i¥x§a¦C li¦W§a©z§l o¦i©i§M D¨PiC§ ¦a©r©Y oi¦` .liW§ ¦ a©z§l o¦i©i§k F` o¦i©i§A o¦i©i§M .D¨l c©a£r Y©§` d¨n .min¨ ¦ k£g©e xi¦`¥n i¦A¦x z¤wFl¢g©n o¦i©i§A o¦i©i§MD¨ PiC§ ¦a©r©Y oi¦`§e oiUFr ¦ oixFRi ¦ v ¦ i¥p§AK¤ x¤C o¥M¤W .xEq¨` oi¦pFvA § lä£` .oi¦g§zFxA § x©n¨` Y©§`§c `¨c¨d .o¨p¨gFi i¦A¦x x©n¨` o¨M§x©C¤W x©g©`¥n oi¥xEq£` Ed§i oi¦g§zFx Elit£ ¦ ` dŸ©r¥n .o¨p§pi¦v§e oi¦g§zFx Ei¨d .`ïi¦l£dÿ FzF` oixFw ¦ e § o¥M .oEv¨l .mix§ ¦nF` min¨ ¦ k£g©e .xi¦`¥n i¦A¦x i¥x§a¦C .xEq¨` m¨b§t§l oi¥A gä§W¦l oi¥A m©r©h oi¦p§zFpÎl¨M .i¥P©z§C xi`¥ ¦ n i¦A¦x§C .o¨p¨gFi i¦A¦x m¥W§a `¨qï i¦A¦x .oiqi ¦ x§ ¦B©l l©t¨P¤W u¤nFg oFbM § .xŸEn m¨b§t¦l .xEq¨` gä§W¦l ei¨nin ¥ ei¨nin ¥ EWi`§ ¦ a¦d¤W i¦R l©r s©` .m¦i©n l¤W xFA©d KFz§a Elt¨ § P¤Wmi xFr ¦ U § o¥k§e .oÖ©Y o¨pi¦P©z§C .ì¦d .lŸMd © i¥ x§a¦C Wi¦w¨l oA ¤ oFrn¦ § W iA¦ ¦ x§e o¨p¨gFi iA¦ ¦ x .z¤wFl£g©n§A .x¥nF` xi`¥ ¦ n i¦A¦x `¨zi¦p§z©n `¨c¨d§e :oi x¨ ¦Yªn i¦A¦x§C Fiz§ ¦ r©C l©r .z¤wFl£g©n§A xi¦`¥n i¦A¦x§C Di¥Y§r©C l©r .o¥k d¨z¨rEnW § .x©n¨` oEA i¦A¦xi¥A i¥qFi i¦A¦x .lŸMd © i¥ x§a¦C Wi¦w¨l o¤A oFrn¦ § W i¦A¦x§e o¨p¨gFi Halakhah 3: “If libation wine fell on grapes,” etc. Our Mishnah if their seal is not loosened. But if their seal was loosened they are as injured33. 444 AVODAH ZARAH CHAPTER FIVE

How do you treat them34? Like wine in wine or wine in a dish35? If you treat it like wine in a dish, according to everybody it is forbidden. If you treat it like wine in wine, there is the disagreement between Rebbi Meïr and the Sages36. 37Rebbi Johanan said, this you say if it is hot. But cold it is forbidden, for the people of Sepphoris are used to make it and call it laxative38. If it was hot and one cooled it down? Then even hot it should be forbidden since usually it cools down39. 40As we have stated41. “Everything that can be smelled is forbidden, whether it improves or spoils, the words of Rebbi Meïr. But the Sages say, if it improves it is forbidden, if it spoils it is permitted,” as for example vinegar which fell into broken beans. Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Johanan: It is Rebbi Meïr’s, as we have stated there42: “If barley grains fell into a cistern of water, even though they made it stink, [the water] is permitted.” About this Mishnah, Rebbi Meïr says it is in dispute, Rebbi Johanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: everybody’s opinion43. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said this tradition so: In the opinion of Rebbi Meïr it is in dispute, in the opinions of Rebbi Johanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish it is everybody’s opinion.

33 Grapes which still sit on the vine with Meïr do permit consumption of the food. intact skin are sealed; if libation wine falls 37 This paragraph is an intrusion here; it on them one washes the bunch and it is should be placed at the end of the Halakhah permitted. But loose grapes have a hole since it refers to the last statement in the where they were sitting on the vine; the Mishnah, forbidden vinegar on broken libation wine enters through this hole and beans. Ihe parallel is in the Babli, 67a. cannot be removed. 38 In the Babli, the dish of Sepphoris is 34 What is the reason that injured grapes called miilgy. This probably comes from on which libation wine fell are forbidden? the Babylonian pronunciation of g as d. As 35 If wine of one kind is mixed with wine the Babli reports, Megillah 24b, Rebbi told of another type, for wine cognoscenti this R. Hiyya the Babylonian to be careful if he definitely is spoilage. But wine added to a quotes Is. 8:17, “I am waiting ( ) for the cooked dish improves the taste. i¦ziM¦ ¦ g§e 36 As noted later, if the forbidden Eternal”, not to blaspheme by saying “I am admixture improves the taste, the mixture is hitting (i¦ziM¦ ¦ d§e).” Now mi¦i©l©g§W are water- forbidden according to everybody. But if it cresses, not making sense for the context. spoils the taste, the rabbis opposing Rebbi The root ldy is not documented in Hebrew HALAKHAH 4 445 or any of the Talmudic Aramaic dialects; but 41 Tosephta Terumot 8:9. one of the many meanings of Arabic 9\N is 42 Mishnah Terumot 10:2. The barley “to purge, to act as laxative.” This is taken grains are heave, forbidden to anybody but a as the meaning here. It cannot be Cohen. Since they spoil the taste of the determined whether the word was water, they impart no sanctity to it. The pronounced with W or U, even though W is water remains permitted to everybody. more likely. 43 This sentence and the following one are 39 An implied answer to this question is impossible; Rebbi Meïr the fourth- found in the Babli: Vinegar in the cold dish generation Tanna cannot engage in a improves the taste and therefore makes it discussion with the second generation forbidden. If the dish then is heated the Amoraim RR. Johanan and Simeon ben vinegar spoils the taste but this does not Laqish. The correct statements are from remove the prohibition. Cooling the dish Orlah and Terumot: “About this Mishnah, after heating leaves the dish spoiled. Rebbi Johanan says it is in dispute, Rebbi 40 This paragraph is a corrupted version of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said it is one in Terumot 10:2 (Notes 20-24), Orlah 2:5 (Note 121). It is the continuation of the everybody’s opinion. Rebbi Yose ben discussion why and under which condition Rebbi Abun said this tradition so: In the contamination with libation wine makes opinion of Rebbi Johanan it is in dispute, in food prohibited. Babli 67b/68a. the opinion of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish it is everybody’s opinion.”

]|ZzIwJzDG{L{GPyCP)Z{QzOP)Z{2yQRyL|LLx&|0OxC{[z8yLPyU[LyDvU|QG{L{Gw:Ly[zN{S :C¹DPYN (fol. 44c) OxCLyOzQ|%Rw$R)UzQy:R{$|[D)%yLzHP)

44 The Jew transports kosher wine and that he would lose his job and face a damage hires a Gentile as help. Even if the Jew does suit. not see the Gentile at every moment; the fact 45 The Jew informed the Gentile that he that the Jew is around will prevent the was leaving for some time. Gentile from touching the wine if he knows 46 The containers are of clay and are 446 AVODAH ZARAH CHAPTER FIVE closed. If the expected time of absence of would recognize a hole freshly filled. He the owner is sufficient for the Gentile to drill therefore forbids the wine only if there was a hole in the cover, close it again and seal it, time for the Gentile to remove the old seal the wine becomes forbidden. completely, make a new one and have it dry 47 He thinks that the owner upon his return to become undetectable. dï¨d¤W c¨g¤ì¦ x§k¨p§a d¤U£r©n .l¥ÈnW § i¦A¦x x©n¨` .'lek xia£ ¦ r©n dï¨d¤Wi¦ x§k¨p :C¹DKLD (44d line 21) .ix§ ¥n«¨` .x©q¨`§e EdÄ©` i¦A¦x i¥nFw `¨c§aFr `z£ ©` .mFwn§l ¨ mFwÖ¦n o¦i©i i¥C©M l¥`¨x§U¦i m¦r xi¦a£r©n r©b¨p§es© x¨h§C .zFxiq£ ¥ g Elit£ ¦ ` `¨N¤` zFì¥l§n xä¨C sFq `Ÿl .o¨wix§ ¦f i¦A¦x x©n¨` .`¨c§aFr i¥e£d zFgEzt¦ § A .x©f¨g§e `¨cï§A oFdnFzi § W§ ¦ C .`¨x§nEg§l `¨N¤` ìd ¦ zi¥l§e `¨NEw§l l¥ì¦l§n©B o¤A oFrn¦ § W oÄ©x§c `¨c¨d§C x©a§q Y©§` .s¨B©n h©r§n o¦pÄ©x§C Halakhah 4: “A Non-Jew who was transporting,” etc. Rebbi Samuel said, it happened that a Non-Jew was transporting wine jugs with a Jew from one place to another. The case came before Rebbi Abbahu who forbade. They said, the case was about open [containers]48. Rebbi Zeriqan said, not only full ones but also short ones; for he suddenly could have touched with his hand and removed it49. You may be of the opinion that Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel’s statement was a leniency, but rather it is a stringency. For the opening of the rabbis leaves little of the cover50.

48 The ruling of R. Abbahu does not it is not possible for the Gentile to touch the contradict the Mishnah. The wine wine and remove his hand in less than a containers are only “presumed to be second, the wine is forbidden. watched” if on top they are closed with a 50 While Rabban Simeon requires time for clay cover. Open containers, where the the cover to dry, he envisages the possibility wine could be touched in no time, are never that the Gentile drill a small hole in the “presumed to be watched”. cover, whereas the rabbis only contemplate 49 Even if the container has a narrow neck the removal of most of the old cover. and is not full, so that even without a cover i¦A¦x .zx¤ ¤YEn Ff ix£ ¥d mi¦YEk§N¤W dïElv § d¨vi¥A .i¦O¦` i¦A¦x m¥W§a i¦f¨R x©A d¨cEd§i i¦A¦x (44d line 26) liW§ ¦ a©z§A .x©n¨` Y©§`§c `¨c¨d .oix¨ ¦YEn ENi` ¥ i¥x£d mi¦YEk i¥li¦W§a©Y .x¨f§r«¨l iA¦ ¦ x m¥W§a `¨g¨` x©A aŸw£r©i .i¥P©z§c `¨c¨d§M .dïi¨p£d©a Elit£ ¦ ` xEq¨` o©z¨P¤W ì¦xÄ xä¨C `¨d .u¤nFgë o¦i©i FkFz§l z¥z¨l FMx© §C oi¥`¤W i¥p§R¦n d¨z¨b§xeA§N¤W§e .W¥B©R x©t§M i¥p§R¦n .xEq¨` Èd dÖ¨l xecbe` l¤W D¨pi¥i .oix§ ¦nF` Eid ¨ d¨ pFW`x¨ ¦A HALAKHAH 4 447 d¨nEzqE § dxEq£ ¨ ` mFw¨nÎl¨kÄ d¨gEzR § .xnFl © Ex§f«¨g .m¥l¨W x©t§M i¥p§R¦n zi¦XeM oi¥r§N¤W .d¨wixFq ¦ zi¥A x©n¨` .d¨gEzt¦ § kFf i¥ x£d .x©n¨` d¨lEw£g o¤A w¨g§v¦i i¦A¦x .d¨nEzq¦ § k ì¦di¥ x£d d¨nEzWE § däEw§p .z¤ x¤YEn `¨c¨d§M .z©gŸ©R§zi` ¦ `¨l oi¦`§e .z©gŸ©R§zi` ¦ `Ÿl xiw§i ¦ D¥iFNir ¦ dë£d oi¦` .m¥iiw © lik§i ¦ `¨p£`©e .d¨pi¦p£g i¦A¦x `¨c¨g i¦l i¦z§ii©` .Di¥l x©n£` .Di¥A©b§l `¨x§t©q `©z£` .o¨ iix© §n©U©c dïix¦ §w `¨c¨d§l l©f£` x¨f§r«¨l oA ¤ oFrnW ¦ i¦A¦x .iz§ ¦ W KÖ©w `¨rEAn © `¨d .Di¥l xn£ ©` .iFl£r gx¨ ©h©` .iz§ ¦ W KÖ©w `¨rEAn © `¨d .Fl xn¨ ©` .`¨niz§ ¦ U `¨lEw KŸ§x©n K¨W§t©p oi`§ ¦ e .i¦z§W KÖ©w `¨rEAn © `¨d K¨W§t©p§C Di¥x¨n Y©§` oi¦` .Di¥l xn£ ©` .iFl£r gx§ ©h©n Di¥z¦n£g .mizEM ¦ d © El§w§l©w§z¦p xä§M :dŸ«¨` W¤t´p ¤ l©r†©AÎm` ¦ L¤rFlA § oi´¦M©U ´Ÿ§n©U§e Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi in the name of Rebbi Immi: A roasted egg of Samaritans is permitted51. Rebbi Jacob bar Aha in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Samaritans’ dishes are permitted. This is what you say about a dish usually made without wine or vinegar. Therefore if it is certain that he put some in, it is forbidden even for usufruct52. As what had been stated: In earlier times they used to say, why is the wine of Ogdor forbidden? Because of Kefar-Pagesh, and of Burgata because of the Saracen tower, and of the Kushit spring because of Kefar Shalem53. They changed to say, open it54 is everywhere forbidden, sealed it is permitted. Perforated and repaired it is like sealed, Rebbi Isaac ben Haqula said, it is like open. Rebbi Hanina said, I can confirm. If it has a cavity on it55 it was not opened, otherwise it was opened. As the following: Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar went to the city of Samaria56. The scribe came to him. He told him, bring me a closed jug57. He answered him, there is a spring in front of you, drink. He importuned him; he said, there is a spring in front of you, drink. When he saw that he was going to importune him, he told him, if you are master of yourself, there is a spring in front of you, drink. But if your soul brings you to rebellion, you are going to swallow a knife if you are too covetous58. The Samaritans already are degenerate59.

51 There is no suspicion that it not be and the second Samaritan. Kefar Shalem kosher. may be the place mentioned in Gen. 33.18 52 Samaritan wine is forbidden as if it as situated near Sichem. were Gentile wine. 54 Wine sold in open amphoras since there 53 These places are not identified; also it is is no controlling who might have touched it. not clear whether the wine of the first 55 This translation is tentative; it is offered mentioned locality is forbidden because it is as an educated guess. The proposal of Pene Samaritan close to the second one settled by Moshe to read ixiw “cera, wax” instead of Gentiles, or that the first locality is Jewish xiwi is not very convincing; a wax seal can 448 AVODAH ZARAH CHAPTER FIVE easily be counterfeit. The explanation of M. with. Sokoloff, to read here as at other places 56 In the Babli, Hulin 6a, he was sent by “worth, expense” is even less convincing; it R. Meïr to buy wine from Samaritans. seems illogical to assume that wine was not 57 Of wine to drink. tampered with because it was expensive. 58 Prov. 23:2. The explanation given is based on Arabic 59 This projects the Amoraic development LW^ “cavity”. If the clay seal on top of the of separation of Jews from Samaritans into amphora is not plane it probably is original, Tannaitic times (and it was not complete if it is smooth it may have been tampered even in Fatimid Egypt.)

.oFl xn£ ©` .Di¥A©b§l `ïizEM © oEz£` .qi¦lFR©I¥p `¨c¨d§l l©f£` i¥qFi i¦A¦xi¥A l`¥r¨n§W¦i i¦A¦x (44d line 41) m¨zF` oFnh¦I© § e ai¦z§k¦C .iFzEgz¦ § c `ïin§l© © v§l `¨N¤` `¨xEh oid£ ¥`©loi¦ c§b«¨q oFY©`zi¥l§ C oFk§l i¦n§g©n `¨p£` oEPi`§ ¦ C r©cie ¦ .`ïi©AEM oi¥Ni¦`§l x©C§q¦p uFx§w¦p .oix§ ¦n«¨` oi¦l¨w r©n§W :m«¤k§WÎmr ¦ x¬¤W£` d†¨l`«¨ ¥ d z©g¬©Y aŸ½w£r«©i .Di¥l w©t§pEu© x§wE .Di¥pElh§ § w¦n Erä i¦A¦x .oiv§ ¦ n©w l©k£` dÏ¦w§f¦g i¦A¦x .oiv§ ¦ n©g l©k£` dï§n§x¦i i¦A¦x .ohi¦l£ ¦ g l©k£`©e qEÒ¤l © l©f£` `¨g¨` i¦A¦x dï¨d¤W c¨g¤` iEB E`x§ ë K¤l¤O©d x©d§A oi¦lFr Ei¨d¤W i¦O¦` i¦A¦x§e i¦Q©` i¦A¦x§e dïig ¦ i¦A¦x i¦R¦n o¨pi¥i xq¨ ©` EdÄ©` `¨c¨g .x©nin ¥ i¥rä§C zi¦`§e .`¨Ni¦r i¥c§i l©r `¨l§e .oFl xn£ ©` .iFnFw Di¥l oExn«¨ § ` oFz£` .o¨pi¥i l©r cEW¨g d©n o¦n `ïi§l©n z©g¨M©Y§Wi` ¦ `ÄEW iwEt ¥ A § .i¥wih¥ ¦ x©n©qÎl¨k§a `¨x§n©g g©M©Y§Wi` ¦ `ªl `ÄEW z©aEx£r `¨M§l©n qEpÏ¦h¥lwŸiC ¦ wi¦l§k c©M .xni © n ¥ i¥rä§C zi¦`§e .oFd§Pin ¦ `ïizEM © Di¥pElA© § w§e `ïiO© ©x£` oEzii`§ ©c i¥rä§C zi`§ ¦ e .o¨pi¥i xq¡ ¨ `¤p§e `ïizEM © oEkq«¨ § p§e .ii¥`¨CEi on ¦ x©a oEkQ© § p§i `ïiOE`Îl¨ © M .x©n£`©e x©f§B `¨k¨d§l .Di¥l oi¦k§Q©p¨nE oFd§l zi¦` oFi oin§ ¦ M .x©nin ¥ Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose went to the wellknown Neapolis60. The Samaritans came to him. He told them, I am seeing you bowing down not to this mountain but to the idols under it, as it is written, he hid them under the terebinth near Sichem61. He heard their voices saying, let us get up early and gather those thorns. He understood that they intended to kill him; he got up early and left. Rebbi Aha went to Emmaus and ate something made in boiling water62. Rebbi Jeremiah ate pickles. Rebbi Hizqiah ate locusts63. Rebbi Abbahu forbade their wine on the testimony of Rebbi Hiyya, Rebbi Assi, and Rebbi Immi who went up King’s Mountain and saw a Gentile who was suspected because of wine64. They came and said it before him. He told them, but not as a pretext65. But some say, one Sabbath eve no wine was found in all of Samaria66. When Sabbath ended, it was found full from what the Arameans HALAKHAH 4 449 brought and the Samaritans accepted from them67. But some say, when King Diocletian came here he decided and said, all peoples have to offer libations except the Jews. The Samaritans offered libations and their wine was forbidden. But some say, they have a kind of dove and they offer libations to it.

60 The former Sichem, today Nablus. wine which was not actually used in pagan 61 Gen. 35:4. exercises. 62 Dumplings or bagels, any grain product 65 He wanted to forbid Samaritan wine prepared in hot water is called hEl¨g. only upon solid evidence. 63 All three considered Samaritan cooking 66 The district. as kosher. (Also Samaritan slaughter, Babli 67 As noted earlier, they had no reason to Hulin 5b). forbid Gentile wine. But this made 64 He was suspected of selling Gentile Samaritan wine equal to Gentile wine for wine to Samaritans. The latter, as rabbinic Jews. Of all reasons given, this Sadducees, had no reason to forbid Gentile seems the most plausible. d©n i¥p§R¦n m¤Y©` .Ep¨N¤W§A oi¦w§R©Y§q¦n Ei¨d m¤ki¥zFa£` .EdÄ©` i¦A¦x¥n Eräi¥ x¨qiw§ ©c `ïizEM © (44d line 54) .m¤kiU£ ¥ r©n m¤Y§l©w§l¦w m¤Y©` .m¤diU£ ¥ r©n El§w§l¦w `Ÿl m¤ki¥zFa£` .od¨l ¤ x©n¨` .EP¤O¦n oi¦w§R©Y§q¦n m¤k§i¥` The Samaritans of Caesarea asked Rebbi Abbahu: Your fathers were providing themselves from us68. Why are you not providing yourselves from us? He answered them, your fathers did not spoil their deeds69, you are spoiling your deeds.

68 They were buying Samaritan wine for rabbinic standards. Tosaphot Hagigah 25a personal use. s. v. drevxy. 69 One could assume that in earlier times Samaritan wine was made according to d¨xFdh § mi¦zEM u¤x¤` .oixFd ¦ h § di¨zFe ¤ w¦ § nE dxFd ¨ h § l¥`¨x§U¦i u¤x¤` .o¨pi¦P©Y oÖ©Y (44d line 58) `¨N¤` li¦a§W o¤d¨loi x§ ¦xFA oi¥`¤W d¨w¨f£g .oixFd ¦ h § di¤li¨ a§ ¦ W .oixFd ¦ h § di¤li¨ a§ ¦ WE di¨ zFxFc¨ ¤ nE di¨ zFe ¥ w¦ § nE .oiaE` ¦ W § o¨pi`¤ ¥W o¨pin£ ¦ `©d§l .xn£ ©` z©§C `¨c¨d i¥qEi i¦A¦xi¥A x¨f§r«¨l iA¦ ¦ x .oixFd ¦ h § di¨ zFe ¤ w¦ § nE .dx£ ¨d©H¦n s©` Èd¤WÎl¨M x¥d¨h§n oïir© § n d©n .m¦i†©nÎd¥e§w¦n xF²aE oïir© § n K´©` i¥W§x«¨c¨C .`Ÿl mi¦rÄ§x©` z©Cin§l ¦ `¨d .ÈdWÎl¨ ¤ M x¥d¨h§n d¥e§w¦n 450 AVODAH ZARAH CHAPTER FIVE i¦A¦x .o¤dini ¥ n ¥ m©B x©qFl oi¦lFk§i Epi¦i¨d i`©e§l©d .oFl xn¨ ©` .Ed¨n o¤d¨NW ¤ hEl¨g .EdÄ©` i¦A¦x¥n oErÄ dŸ©r¥n .i¥rÄ i¥qFi i¦A¦x .ziAi ¦ x¨ ¦A o¨zFe§l©d§l xŸEnoi x¨ ¦q§i©w§c i¥`¨zEM .d¨pi¦p£g i¦A¦x m¥W§a `¨g¨` x©A aŸw£r©i .oEWW£ ¨ g o¦pÄ©x ii¥n£g o¨pë .o©zFNg§l © XEg¨p `Ÿl There70 we have stated: “The Land of Israel is pure and its ritual baths are pure71.” 72“The land of the Samaritans is pure; its ritual baths, and its dwellings73, and its paths are pure.” Its paths are pure; it is a presumption that they would not select a path unless it was pure74. And its ritual baths are pure; Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Yose75: that is, to believe them that they are not from drawn water76, but not for the measure of forty; for they explain, only a spring or a cistern, a collection of water77,” just as a spring cleanses in any amount, any collection of water cleanses in any amount78. They asked Rebbi Abbahu: What is the status of their parboiled food79? He told them, if only we also could prohibit their water! Rebbi Jacob bar Aha in the name of Rebbi Hanina: It is permitted to lend to the Samaritans of Caesarea on interest80. Rebbi Yose asked, if that is so, we should not be worried about their hallah; but we see that the rabbis do worry81.

70 Mishnah Miqwaot 8:1. Gentiles are not sources of “tent impurity” is 71 There is a universal presumption that not found in Yerushalmi sources (Babli every Jewish congregation in the Land of Yebamot 61a, attributed to R. Simeon ben Israel will see to it that its ritual baths are Iohai.) built according to the rules (in particular, 74 They are assumed to be more strict in that the water is natural, ground water or matters of impurity than rabbinic Jews. rain water, not from vessels, and that the 75 The Tanna. amount of water is at last 40 seah (a Roman 76 Which is a source of impurity. culleus, 20 amphorae) as required by 77 Lev. 11:36. rabbinic tradition. A visitor may use any 78 In Sifra Šemini Parašah 9(1) the such miqweh without first investigating its argument attributed here to Samaritans (as status. Cf. Berakhot 3:4, Notes 164-166. Sadducees) is rejected only because of the 72 Tosephta Miqwaot 6:1. rule that K©` “only” must indicate an 73 Gentile dwellings and paths are impure exclusion. This characterizes the rule that even in the Land of Israel since one has to flowing water purifies in any quantity but worry that Gentiles bury their stillborn in standing water only in 40 seah as rabbinical their dirt floors or on their paths. Anybody but in essence it is also found in the walking over such a spot would become Damascus Document CD X 11.. impure by “tent impurity.” The opinion that 79 Which only could be forbidden if HALAKHAH 5 451

Samaritans were considered Gentiles. had duly been given, the attitude of R. Jacob 80 He considers them as Gentiles. bar Aha and R. Abbahu is rejected. Since R. 81 A Gentile baker does not have to give Jacob bar Aha was one of the teachers of R. hallah and should he give it would not have Yose, one has to assume that the latter’s any holiness. If the rabbis insist that position is that of his foremost teacher, R. Samaritan bread may be used only if hallah Jeremiah.

X|J{[zHG{SLFz y2|OT|SzNySC{Lz[|&zSw5{ZzD)O.|O{GzHG{SLyWz4|D)CR([|7|D)SLxL|JLy3|2|G¹¹D¹DPYN (fol. 44c) [xQ)COxCLyOzQ|%Rw$R)UzQy:R{$|[D)%yLzHP)

82 Latin carrum. The teamster trans- 85 The Jew is out of sight and away for an porting the wine (in sealed amphoras) is extended period. Nevertheless the wine is Gentile. permitted if the Gentile has to expect every 83 A ship on a river. minute that the owner of the wine might 84 Latin compendiarium (iter); cf. return. Berakhot 1:1, Note 36. zi¥A l¤X¦n z©g©` oEx©w§a d¤U£r©n .d¨pi¦p£g i¦A¦x x©n¨` .'lek oExT© ©a Fpi¥i gi¦P©© O©dGGNOG 44d line 66 `¨h¨x§h§q¦` `¨c¨d§A .oix§ ¦n«©` .oExW§ § k©`§e o¦pÄ©x i¥nFw `c§ ©aFr `z£ ©` .li¦n z©rÄ§x©`¥n x¥zFi d¨bi¦l§t¦d¤W i¦A¦x oEPiC ¦ xEa¨q Èd§e oi¦aEM oi¦bïiq © i¦n£g EC oi¦p§n¦f .d¨pi¦p£g i¦A¦x x©n¨` .zëe£d l¥`¨x§U¦I¦n D¨NEk§e zë£d o¨cïi©v§C .z¨r§A§z¦n Èd§e W©p i¥p§A Halakhah 5: “If somebody leaves his wine on a cart,” etc. 86Rebbi Hanina said, it happened that a cart of the family of Rebbi was leaving for more than four mil87. The case came before the rabbis who declared it kosher. It was on the road to Sidon populated by Jews88. Rebbi Hanina89 said, sometimes he sees a fence formed by thorn bushes90 and he thinks that they are people and is afraid. 452 AVODAH ZARAH CHAPTER FIVE

86 Quoted in Or Zarua 240 (edition of distance is acceptable only if the cart at all Makhon Yerushalaim 2010, vol. 3 p. 650b); times was seen by Jews. referred to in the Babli, Šabbat 122a. 89 In Or Zarua, R. Hama, a more likely 87 The distance between the Jewish reading. The attribution to R. Hanina of the overseer and the Gentile driver. The mil original statement is confirmed by the Babli. referred to here probably is a quarter of a 90 Which may look like human shapes at a Greek parasanges, 1380 m. distance. 88 In this interpretation, such a large

PyCzH[{<(QT{SzNySzHCxY)LC(Gw:Ly5O|UV|C)](SvJ|DLy[zN{3|G]wC|JLy3|2|GHGS\Q fol. 44c J|

K¨M oi¥A .x©n¨` xi¦`¥n i¦A¦x§C .xi`¥ ¦ n i¦A¦x§kE .'lek FzEp£g©ai¦ x§k¨P©d z¤` gi¦P©© O©d :E¹DKLD 44d line 70 zFx¢d¨h§A q¨Riq§ ¦ n¦A d¨wEl£g©d x¥v¨g§A .d¨pi¦p£g x©A i¥qFi i¦A¦x m¥W§a `¨n¨g i¦A¦x .`¥n¨h z¦i©A©d K¨M oi¥aE oixi ¦ n§ ¦ g©n o¦pÄ©x sE` .Kq¤ ¤ p oi¥i§A l¦winE ¥ zEx¢d¨hÄ xi¦n§g©n xi¦`¥n i¦A¦x `¨d§e .xFdh ¨ K¤q¤p oi¥i§A .`¥n¨h .Kq¤ ¤ p oi¥i§A oi¦liwi ¦ nE ¥ zEx¢d¨hÄ Halakhah 6: “If somebody leaves a Gentile in charge of his store,,” etc. Following Rebbi Meïr? Did not Rebbi Meïr say, “in any case the house is impure?91” Rebbi Hama in the name of Rebbi Yose bar Hanina: If a courtyard is subdivided by a low wall92, for purities it is impure, in matters of libation wine it is pure93, since Rebbi Meïr is restrictive for purities but lenient for libation wine; also the rabbis are restrictive for purities but lenient for libation wine94.

91 Mishnah Tahorot 7:4. Since an attributed to R. Meïr must be resolved. anonymous Mishnah is supposed to follow Since the wine in the store is for sale, it R. Meïr’s formulation, an apparent is stored in open amphoras. The wine would contradiction between two statements become forbidden for usufruct if touched by HALAKHAH 6 453 the Gentile. In our Mishnah it seems that R. to create the presumption that the parties Meïr assumes that the Gentile will not touch will abide by the rules and not trespass. If the open amphoras. But in Mishnah the dwellers in one part are scrupulous in Tahorot 7:4 he holds that if a woman observing the rules of purity while the keeping all rules of ritual purity invites one others are not (or are Gentiles), the vessels careless in these matters to help her in her standing in the courtyard of the observant home all vessels in the home become impure party remain pure. Similarly, if one party is since one must assume that the helper is Jewish and the other Gentile, wine amphoras impure and touches everything in sight. stored in the the Jewish part remain 92 The explanation is Rashi’s (70b, Bava permitted since the presumption is that the batra 2b). The etymology is unknown; the Gentile will not enter the Jewish part. word certainly is different from q¨tiq§ ¥ R 94 While a store catering to customers øyöïò “pebble”. 93 A courtyard (in the back of houses or observant in matters of purity certainly walled in, not directly open to the street) has cannot have a Gentile employee, a grocery been divided by a low wall as a sign that store for the general public can have such an each party has only the use of its own part. employee. In the Babli, 70b, this is reported Even though it is easy to step over the as the opinion of Rav, opposed by R. partition, the fact that it is raised is enough Johanan.

O|URLyE{OzHR{JzO(;|GO|URLyE{OHL{S{W{O|JLy3yGzHR{JzO(;|GO|U)2yUOxN)CG{L{G :F¹ DPYN (fol. 44c) LxHtG)O[|Q{CPyCzH[{<(QLxZyWzOH&| wGO|Uw;G|Q([(T{CR{JzO(;|GO|Uw;G|QC{Y{LzH)JLy3yGzHLxZyWzOH&| wG V)%yLzH J

95 A Gentile. Note 58. A small ornamental table in the 96 Latin lagena, Greek ȜȐȖȘȞȠȢ, ȜȐȖȣȞȠȢ; form of the Pythia’s tripod. Note 28. The vessels contain wine. 98 If the Delphic table is out of the 97 Latin delphica (sc. mensa); Chapter 3:2 Gentile’s reach when the latter is sitting 454 AVODAH ZARAH CHAPTER FIVE down. making authorities of the Middle ages 99 Since the Gentile guest was given pointed out, these rules do not necessarily permission to move around. apply to barrels from which the wine is 100 Since wine is taken out from the open drawn from a spigot near the bottom. top with a bucket. As the French wine

KFzA § xEq¨` o¨g§lEX©d l©r¤X d©n .x©nin ¥ oïi©rA oFe£d .'lek FOr ¦ l¥kF` dï¨d :F¹DKLD (44d line 75) a©x m¥W§a `Ä i¦A¦x x©n¨` o¥k `Ÿl§e .m¦i©cï hEXi¦R¦n uEg xŸEn i¥w¦t§leC© ¤d l©r¤X d©nE .m¦i©cï hEXi¦R o`¨n .i¦pi¥k `¨N¤` .K¤q¤p oi¥i§A mi¦i©cï hEXi¦R Ep§z«¨p K¨M zFx¢d¨H©A mi¦i©cï hEXi¦R Ep§z«¨P¤W m¥W§M .z¤W¥W uEg c©a§N¦aE .xŸEn i¥w¦t§leC© ¤d l©r¤X d©nE .m¦i©cï hEXi¦R KFz§A .xEq¨` o¨g§lEXd © l©r¤X d©n .x©n¨`§C .m¦i©cï hEXi¦R¦n Halakhah 7: “f he was eating with him,” etc. They wanted to say, “anything on the table is forbidden,” within reach of his outstretched arms; “on the Delphic table is permitted,” out of the reach of his outstretched arms101. But did not Rebbi Abba say in the name of Rav Sheshet102, just as they gave outstretched arms for purity so they gave it for libation wine? But it must be the following. He who said, “anything on the table is forbidden,” within reach of his outstretched arms; “on the Delphic table is permitted,” only if103 out of the reach of his outstretched arms.

101 In this first version, anything on a anything within his reach impure, a Gentile separate table is considered out of the reach must be presumed to make all wine within of the Gentile’s hand even if physically it is his reach forbidden. within his reach. 103 Both prohibition and permission are 102 Halakhah 4:11, Note 171. Since an conditional . impure person is presumed to make

])Q(]zT(])[(TvC])J(]z5]),yD{JP)O{:]|Uz:y$[LyU{OG{TzSzNy3w:]w:wO)$ :G¹DPYN (fol. 44c) .x4|SzOLC|Sz5RLxCw:LyWzO])[{<(Q(1LxC{H(1LxCG{Q{JzOyQ]|Uz:y$])[{<(Q Mishnah 8: If an investigative unit104 came to a village in times of peace, open amphoras are forbidden105 and sealed ones permitted. In times of war these and those are permitted since there is no time to make libations106. HALAKHAH 8 455

104 Police or military who enter all houses. wine whether or not it is legal. 105 One may assume that they take from the 106 The soldiers cannot risk getting drunk.

`ŸNW ¤ x¨W§t¤` i¥`¤W .xEq¨` lŸM©d c©n§X©d z©r§W¦A .'lek xi¦r¨l d¨q§p§k¦P¤W z¤W¤lFA :G¹DKLD (45a line 4) d¨lih§ ¥ A D¨pi` ¥ l¥`¨x§U¦i D¨cä£r¤W d¨x¨f d¨cFa£r .dx§ ¨n«¨` `¨c¨d .FgxFM § l©r D¨cä£r `ŸN¤W l¥`¨x§U¦i m¨W dï¨d d¨lih§ ¥ A D¨pi` ¥ Fg§ xFM l©r l¥`¨x§U¦i D¨cä£r¤W d¨x¨f d¨cFa£r .D¨Pin ¦ r©n§W Y©§`§e .i¥qFi i¦A¦x x©n¨` .m¨lFr§l .m¨lFr§l Halakhah 8: “If an investigative unit came to a village,” etc. In times of a religious persecution all is forbidden107; it is impossible that there was not a single Jew who worshipped it under duress. This implies that an idol which was worshipped by a Jew is never invalidated108. Rebbi Yose said, you infer from this that an idol which was worshipped by a Jew under duress is never invalidated109.

107 This does not refer to the Mishnah but there. to a text similar to Tosephta 5:6: Pedestals 109 The statement is much stronger than the erected by Gentiles in times of religious one stated in Halakhah 4:4 since there one persecution (as base for statues of the speaks of idols genuinely worshipped by a Emperor or of Rome, Halakhah 3:10 Note Jew. But here it follows that the act of 231) are never annulled. worship by a Jew makes it permanently 108 This is a statement in Halakhah 4:4, forbidden even if the only intent of the Jew Note 30, for which proof was not given was to escape martyrdom. Cf. Babli 54a. o`¨M zi¦` .`¨xir§ ¦ f i¦A¦x x©n¨` .zFxŸEn `¨N¤` zFxEq£` o`¨M zi¥l .o¨p¨gFi i¦A¦x x©n¨` (45a line 8) Di¥l mi¦l§W `¥d§i`¨l C § Di¥l r©cFn `¨l Di¥a d¤H©n `¨l oi¦`§e .Di¥l r©cFn Èd Di¥a d¤H©n oi¦`§C .zFxEq£` .zW¤lFA ¤ z¤n¤g§l¦n§aE zW¤lFA ¤ mFl¨W§A .o¨p¨gFi i¦A¦x m¥W§a i¦O¦` i¦A¦x .Eaih ¦ Rebbi Johanan said, there is no “forbidden” here, only “permitted”. Rebbi Zeìra said, there is “forbidden” here110. For if he reaches it he will inform him; if he does reach it he will not inform him, lest he owe him a favor111. Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Johanan: If the investigative unit comes in peaceful or warring manner112.

110 R. Johanan deletes the first part of the 111 If the investigator opens the wine Mishnah; R. Zeìrah confirms the text of the amphora, he will inform the owner. Then Mishnah. the wine will be forbidden under the general 456 AVODAH ZARAH CHAPTER FIVE rules of wine touched by a pagan; the amphora was not touched. It is this later Mishnah is not necessary in this case. If he statement which R. Zeìra objects to. does not open the amphora the owner may 112 It is not a question whether the assume that the investigator did not inform investigators are sent by the villagers’ own him out of malice; even if there was time for government or a hostile power but whether new clay to dry (following Rabban Simeon they come with friendly or adversary intent, ben Gamliel) one may assume that the expecting collaboration or hostile reception. oi` ¥ .oi x§ ¦n«¨` .oEx§W§k©`§e o¦pÄ©x i¥nFw `¨c§aFr `z£ ©` .`äFb§l lt§p © Dix§ ¥z©a i¥x£t i¦n `ï§eig ¦ (45a line 12) .qxi ¤ ` ¥ li¦ H©d§l i`©p§R A snake when pursuing him fell in a pit. The case came before the rabbis who declared it usable. They said, there was no time to deposit poison113.

113 This is an unrelated story; its drunk from the fluid and in the process left connection with the Mishnah is the its own poison in the fluid; Halakhah 2:3. expression “there was no time” to cause Here it is noted that if the snake fell into a damage. The problem here is the general cistern full of wine while attacking (a prohibition to drink water or wine that was human?, an animal?) it is not intent on left standing unsupervised. This is a drinking but will try to get out, so as not to sanitary, not a religious, rule since we are drown, as fast as possible. Therefore there afraid that a poisonous snake could have is no health hazard in drinking the wine.

Rw<)O([zQCr,w:[{<(Q.wTwSRLxLOw:]LyD{JLy[zN{SPwG{OJ|O{;w:OxC{[z8yLPLyS{2(C :H¹DPYN (fol. 44c) [(T{CR{](:[y zOT{SzNy3w;yQPyC{GLwQ{&]wC(S{O Mishnah 9: Jewish craftsmen whom a Gentile sent an amphora of libation wine114 as their wages are permitted to tell him, give us its worth115. After it came to their possession it is forbidden.

114 Which is forbidden for usufruct to the cannot accept the merchandise and then Jew and therefore worthless to them. request that it be exchanged for money; this 115 They can refuse to accept the amphora would be usufruct of forbidden wine, not and ask for payment in money. But they payment for work done. g¥N© W§ © n¦A .`¨ x¨R©w x©a i¥P©Y .K¤q¤p o¦i©i mEX¦n xEq¨` oi¥`§e .'lek l`¨ ¥x§U¦i oi¦p¨OE`¹¹H¹DKLD 45a line 13 .miY¨ ¦ A©A HALAKHAH 9 457

Halakhah 9: “Jewish craftsmen,” etc. Is it not forbidden because of libation wine? Bar Qappara stated, if he sends it to houses116. 116 If the amphora were delivered by a forbidden. Therefore one must assume that Jewish teamster, he would act as the Jew’s the Jew rents his place of work in a building agent and the wine would be forbidden. dedicated to artisans’ workshops; delivery Similarly, if the wine were delivered by a there by a Gentile transporter does not Gentile to the property of the artisan, the transfer property rights and the artisan may delivery would effect the transfer of refuse acceptance and require payment in property rights and the wine would be coin.

Z|T{WCr1w:F|UF|F{QRL[{ y<(QHL{Q{&F|F{QCr1w:F|UZ|T{5Ly[zN{3|O)SLxL[xN)2|G :I¹DPYN (fol. 44c) Ow:)]LyJ)OzY.)]zOF|F{Q()O{KzS( Ly[zN{SOw:)]LyJ)OzY.)]zOF|F{Q(.x5z:|2|G]wCO|K{SRL[(Tv y CHL{Q{& G{[xUw:]wC[{<(Q(3w2yQG{[xUw:]wCLyOw0OwCLyOw0yQGw[{UzQ|G[(T{CRyL|L]wDw7|U)$:wLPyCOxC{[z8yL [(T{C)N)]zO Mishnah 10: If somebody sells his wine to a Non-Jew, in case he fixed the price before that one measured, the proceeds are permitted117; if that one measured before he fixed the price, the proceeds are forbidden118. If he took the funnel and measured into a Non-Jew’s vessel, then took it and measured into the vessel of a Jew, if it is contaminated with wine it is forbidden119. If somebody pours from a vessel to another, what is poured from is permitted120, what is poured into is forbidden121.

117 The entire amphora is sold wholesale amphora he is moving the wine and this for a fixed price. By accepting the deal the turns it into libation wine forbidden for Gentile becomes the owner and owes the usufruct. money to the Jew. If then he takes the 119 If the wine is sold in retail quantities measuring rod and dips it into the wine, the and a funnel is used to pour from the wine already is his property and what he amphora into a smaller vessel, it is essential does with it is irrelevant for Jewish law. that the funnel be thoroughly cleansed after 118 If the Gentile buys the wine by volume, wine was sold to a Gentile. Since the wine the contents of the amphora have to be becomes forbidden the moment it reaches measured before the deal is concluded. It is the Gentile’s vessel, any drops clinging to essential that the measuring be done by a the bottom of the funnel which was Jew since if the Gentile dips the rod into the immersed in the Gentile’s wine also are 458 AVODAH ZARAH CHAPTER FIVE forbidden. Since libation wine is forbidden influence on the status of the wine in the most minute amounts, a single drop remaining in the amphora. remaining on the funnel turns everything 121 The Yerushalmi does not discuss passing through the funnel into libation whether wine poured from an amphora into wine. a Gentile’s vessel becomes forbidden when 120 While we hold that fluids conduct it reaches the vessel or when it leaves the impurity, so that continuous pouring from a amphora. The difference is relevant to the pure into an impure vessel will transfer the previous case that a funnel was used in the impurity to the fluid remaining in the upper process. In the first case, the funnel has to vessel, we do not hold so for the prohibition be cleansed only in that part which was of libation wine. Therefore if wine is immersed in the lower vessel; in the second poured from an amphora into a smaller case it has to be cleansed and dried vessel, the status of the smaller vessel has no thoroughly from top to bottom.

`¨wi¦f§A c©b§p¦C o¥d¨`§e .a©x m¥W§a `¨pEd a©x `Ä i¦A¦x .'lek ix§ ¦k¨P©l Fpi¥i x¥kFOd © :I¹DKLD 45a line 15 e©B D¨l li¦r§n Elit£ ¦ ` d¨kix§ ¦v o¥k¨l .oEA i¦A¦xi¥A i¥qFi i¦A¦x x©n¨` .DÄ aïig © `¨l Di¥cï§a `¨r¨f§ain ¦ ì¦d§e ii©B©g i¦A¦x x©n¨` .zFg¨R©d x©r©W§M Fl d¤p¨TiY¤ ¦ W Ed¨n .oFxFg Dä d¤M§f¦i `¨l§c `¨N¤` o¥ee©M§z¦` `¨l§e d¨zEpg © .ix§ ¦k¨P©l Fpi¥i x¥kFOd © .oÖ©Y o¨pi¦P©z§C .zFg¨R©d x©r©W§M Fl zi¥p§w¦p D¨pi`¤ ¥W d¨x§n«¨` `¨zi¦p§z©n .i¥qFi i¦A¦x i¥nFw Fl zFpT¦l ¨ x¥nF` dŸ©` m¦` .oixEq£ ¦ ` ei¨n¨C w©q¨t `ŸN¤W c©r c©c¨n .oix¨ ¦YEn ei¨n¨C c©c¨n `ŸN¤W c©r w©q¨R .oix¨ ¦YEn ei¨n¨cEi d¦i§ § e c©c¨n `ŸN¤W c©r w¥QiR¤ ¦ W i¦n§k d¤U¨ri¥i w¥Qit ¦ `ŸNW ¤ c©r c©c¨n Eli¦t£` zFg¨R©d x©r©W§M Halakhah 10: “If somebody sold his wine to a Non-Jew,” etc. 122Rebbi Abba, Rav Huna in the name of Rav: One who handles a wine-skin and it splits in his hand is not responsible for it. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, it is necessary even if he takes it in the store when he has no other intention than that no other person should take it. Can he take possession at a minimal rate123? Rebbi Haggai said before Rebbi Yose, a Mishnah says that it cannot become his possession at a minimal rate, as we have stated there: “If somebody sells his wine to a Non-Jew, in case he fixed the price before that one measured, the proceeds are permitted; if that one measured before he fixed the price, the proceeds are forbidden.” If you say that it can come into his possession at a minimal price, even if he measured before he fixed the price should be as if he fixed the price before he measured and the proceeds would be permitted.

122 The text is copied from Qiddušin 1:4, to the theory of transfer of property; it is Notes 420-429. The first paragraph belongs irrelevant here. The origin of the second HALAKHAH 10 459 clearly is in Qiddušin since the Mishnah for a similar product within the last few here is quoted as “there”, even though the days. Then it would be irrelevant whether text here is slightly better. the wine was measured before or after the 123 If there is firm intention to buy one price was fixed. Since prices are influenced could argue that the buyer already agreed to by news, the question could have been pay no less than the lowest price recorded dismissed out of hand. Babli 72a.

.m«¨C¦n d¨AEw£r x©ni¥z§c d©n§M .K¥l§k©l§n¦C `Ed©d§A .o¦i©i z¤a¤w£r Ed¨n (45a line 23) What means “contaminated with wine”124? If it is dirty, as one says, immersed in blood125.

124 The expression is uncommon and in the remainder”. Mishnah in the Babli and the independent 125 Hos. 6:8. Mishnah mss. is replaced by z¤a¤M£r “a

.xEq¨` lŸM©d i¥x§a¦C d¤x¨r§n iFB©d§e K¥R§W©O©d i¦t§A U¥tFY l¥`¨x§U¦i .`¨z§Nin ¦ `¨c `¨hiW§ ¦ R (45a line 24) l¥`¨x§U¦i§e cFPd © i¦t§A U¥tFY iFB .xiY© ¦ n i¦O¦` i¦A¦x§e x¥qF` i¦Q©` i¦A¦x .d¤x¨r§n l¥`¨x§U¦i§e K¥R§W©O©A U¥tFY iFB `¨c§ii©d .i¥qFi i¦A¦x i¦nFw `¨rä `¨p¨n i¦A¦x .z¤wFl£g©O©d ì¦d .`¨xir§ ¦ f i¦A¦x m¥W§a dï§n§x¦i i¦A¦x .d¤x¨r§n oix§ ¦a«¨q .d¤x¨r§n iFB§e cFP©A U¥tFY l¥`¨x§U¦i .iO¦ ¦ ` i¦A¦x§e i¦Q©` i¦A¦x z¤wFl£g©n .Di¥l x©n¨` .z¤wFl£g©n eic¨ ï d¤R©x§n l¥`¨x§U¦I¤W mi¦n¨r§R¤W .xEq¨`¤W x©n¨` `¨n§x©B l¨M l¥ÈnW § i¦A¦x .xŸEn lŸM©d i¥x§a¦C .x©nin ¥ .i¦l¥k§l i¦l¥M¦n d¤x¨r§n mEX¦n FA oi` ¥ r© x§l li¥r¥n `¨wi¦f l¥B©x§n¦c Ed`ë .iFBd © z©n§g©n iExir¨ ¦ dÎl¨M `¨v§n¦p§e The following is obvious: If the Jew holds the funnel and the Gentile pours, everybody agrees that is it forbidden126. If the Gentile holds the funnel and the Jew pours, Rebbi Assi127 forbids and Rebbi Immi permits. If the Gentile holds the opening of the wineskin and the Jew pours128, Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Zeìra: this is the disagreement. Rebbi Mana asked before Rebbi Yose, which disagreement? He told him, the disasgreement between Rebbi Assi and Rebbi Immi. If the Jew holds the wineskin and the Gentile pours, they wanted to say that according to everybody it is permitted. Rebbi Samuel: In itself it implies that it is forbidden. For sometimes the Jew will loosen his grip and then the entire pouring is done by the Gentile129. If somebody lets down130 a wineskin from top to bottom this is not pouring from vessel to vessel. 460 AVODAH ZARAH CHAPTER FIVE

126 If the Gentile tilts the Amphora, he 129 And even the wine remaining in the moves the wine in it and the entire contents skin is forbidden. of the amphora become libation wine 130 It is not too clear what the hapax lbx (as forbidden for all usufruct. Babli 60a. Palestinian Aramaic verb) means. It is 127 This is his Babli name; in the conjectured that it means “to turn upside Yerushalmi he otherwise appears as R. down”. It is taken here in one of the

Yasa. Possibly one also should read the meanings of Arabic 9GL “to lower”. If a Babylonian Ammi for Galilean Immi. sealed kosher wineskin is handled by a 128 The Gentile keeps the opening of the Gentile it remains permitted. wineskin in a fixed position; the Jew lifts the skin to pour.

RyL|LC(Gw:¡O{0PyL|Qz$PyL|Q(RyL|Lz$RyL|LC(Gw:¡O{Nz$[xT)CzH[(T{C.wTwSRLxL :@I¹DPYN (fol. 44c) PU| |KRx])Sz$)SLyQzDCr1w:zHC(Gw:¡O{0)SLyQz$RLyQO{Oz0|GGwIPU| |KRx])Sz$RyL|Lz$PyL|Q(PyL|Qz$ Mishnah 11: Libation wine is forbidden and makes forbidden in the most minute amount. Wine mixed with wine131 or water mixed with water132 in the most minute amount. Wine in water or water in wine, if it gives taste133. This is the principle, kind in the same kind in the most minute amount, kind in another kind if it gives taste.

131 Libation wine mixed with kosher wine. forbidden substance is less than one sixtieth 132 Holy water used for pagan rituals. of the permitted; cf. Terumot Chapter 10. 133 In the practice of the Babli, if the m¦i©O©d oi¥`¤W mFwn§ Ä .x©ni¥z§c `¨c¨d .x©n¨` dÏ¦w§f¦g .'lek xEq¨` K¤q¤p RLxL :@I¹DKLD (45a line 32) .od ¥ o¦i©i§A o¦i©i§M d¨Cin§ ¦ Aoi x¨ ¦M§n¦p m¦i©O©d¤W mFw¨n§A lä£` .dCi ¨ n§ ¦ Aoi x¨ ¦M§n¦p Halakhah 11: “Libation wine is forbidden,” etc. Hizqiah said, that is at a place where water is not sold by measure. But at a place where water is sold by measure it is like wine in wine134.

134 If water is so precious that it is sold two equally important fluids and treated as bottled, mixing wine and water is mixing equals. This rule is not found in the Babli. HALAKHAH 11 461

KFzA § x¥zid§ ¥e xEQi` ¦ KFz§A xEQi` ¦ l©t¨p§e x¥zid¥ ¥nE xEQi`¥ ¦ n Fb¨f§O¤W qEM .xn¨ ©` dÏ¦w§f¦g (45a line 34) i¦A¦x x©n¨` .`ä i¦p£` oFx£g©` x©g©` .x©n¨` x¤f¤ri¦l i¦A¦x§C .ì¦d x¤f¤ri¦l i¦A¦x§C .l¥ÈnW § i¦A¦x x©n¨` .x¥zid ¥ `¥d§i sFq§A x¥zid ¥ l©t¨p Elit£ ¦ ` K¤q¤p oi¥i§a Èd xnFg ¤ m` ¦ .i¥rä i¥qEi i¦A¦x .K¤q¤p oi¥i§a Èd xnFg ¤ .dï§n§x¦i .Fpi¥`¤W in§ ¦ M x¥zid© ¥d z¤` d¤`Fx Y©§ ` x¥zid¥ ¥nE xEQi`¥ ¦ n Fb¨f§O¤W qEM .o¨p¨gFi i¦A¦x m¥W§a i¦Q©` i¦A¦x .xEq¨` x¥zid ¥ l©t¨P¤W Èd§e .dï§r©WEd i¦A¦x x©n¨` .xŸEn e`¨l m¦`§e .xEq¨` m©r©h o¥zFpA § FA W¥i m` ¦ xEQi¦`¨d§e x¥zid ¥ sFqA § x¥zid§ ¥e d¨Ni¦g§Y©A xEQi` ¦ l©t¨P¤W oi¥A `ïi§p©W `Ÿl§e .o¨p¨gFi i¦A¦x m¥W§a i¦O¦` i¦A¦x .sFqA § i¦n§M x¥zid© ¥d z¤` d¤`Fx Y©§ ` x¥zid¥ ¥nFk x¨ §vÎl©M b¨f§n¦p Eli¦t£` o¦i©i§A m¦i©n Elit£ ¦ ` .sFqA § xEQi`§ ¦ e d¨Ni¦g§Y©A o¨l£r©n§l `¨c¨d .`¨xi¥f i¦A¦x x©n¨` .xŸEn e`¨l m¦`§e .xEq¨` m©r©h o¥zFpA § FA W¥i m` ¦ xEQi¦`¨d§e .Fpi`¤ ¥W oi¥i zigFl ¦ v § .o¨p¨gFi i¦A¦x m¥W§A EdÄ©` i¦A¦x oEA iA¦ ¦ xi¥A i¥qFi i¦A¦x .`ci ¨ a£ ¦ r Kid ¥ o¦ii¨piY ¦ D¨NEk§ez© x¨n£`¨zi` ¦ i¦n§M x¥zid© ¥d z¤` d¤`Fx Y©§ ` .m¦i©n l¤W xFA KFz§l d¨l§t«¨p K¨M x©g©`§e m¦i©n l¤W zi¦a¨g§l d¨l§t«¨P¤W K¤q¤p .xŸEn e`¨l m`§ ¦ e .xEq` ¨ m©r©h o¥zFpA § FA W¥i m` ¦ xEQi`¨ ¦ d§e .Fpi`¤ ¥W wgvi ax xa lèny R | lèny 2 (2x) seqa R | jeza xzidd one xeqi`d on R | xzidne xeqi`n 1 ini` R | in` 6 xzidd R | xzid xeqi`d eze` R | xeqi`de 5 `qi R | iq` 4 oexg`d R | oexg` | `xif xeqi`d eze` R | xeqi`de 8 xzidd on R | xzidn oiie R | oiia 7 xzidl R | xzid `le R | `l jezl R | ziagl 10 oiily R | oii oiiepiz R | oiipiz xn` z`c R | zxn`zi` 9 - R | olrnl `xirf R xeqi`d eze` R | xeqi`de 11 dltpe R | dltp dxfge R | jk xgè oiily R | min ly ziag 135Hizqiah said, if somebody mixed a cup from forbidden and from permitted [wine], if the forbidden fell in [last]136 it makes it forbidden, permitted [last] makes it permitted. Rebbi Samuel [bar Rav Isaac] said, this follows Rebbi Eliezer, as Rebbi Eliezer said, I am going after the last one137. Rebbi Jeremiah said, this is a stringency about libation wine. Rebbi Yose asked, if it were a stringency about libation wine, even if the permitted fell in last it should be forbidden! Rebbi Assi127 in the name of Rebbi Johanan: if somebody mixed a cup from forbidden and from permitted [wine], one considers the permitted as nonexistent; if the forbidden does impart taste it is forbidden, otherwise permitted. Rebbi Hoshaia said, only if the permitted fell in last. Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Johanan, it does not make any difference whether the forbidden fell in first and the permitted last or the permitted first and the forbidden last, even water and wine, even if it was mixed perfectly from permitted, one considers the permitted as nonexistent; if the forbidden does impart taste it is forbidden, otherwise permitted138. Rebbi Zeìra said, this has been said about the preceding; how can it be? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Johanan, if a flask of libation wine fell into an amphora of (water)139 and then it fell into a water 462 AVODAH ZARAH CHAPTER FIVE cistern, one considers the permitted as nonexistent; if the forbidden does impart taste it is forbidden, otherwise permitted140.

135 From here to the end of the Halakhah 137 Mishnah Òrlah 2:10. the text is from Orlah 2:7 (R), Notes 138 Babli 73b. 158-174. The text there is superior in the 139 In R “wine” (permitted wine). Only this tradition both of text and of names. makes sense; otherwise there would be no 136 Added from R, needed for compre- need to mention two different vessels. hension. 140 Babli 73a. i©z¨ni`¥ ¥n .`¨c¨d¥n D¨pir§ ¦ n§Wi¦p .zg© ©`§M m¦i©p§W Elt«¨ § p .d¤f x©g©` d¤f Elt«¨ § P¤W§A oFcM § c©r (45a line 49) oinFY ¦ g© § p§N¤W§e .dïit£ ¦ `©N¤W zFzÄ©W WŸl¨W miY¨ ¦ A i¥l£r©A l¤W .g©q¤R©d x©g©`§l xŸEn mizEM ¦ u¥n¨g .Exn«¨ § `¤W§M s©` .x¥nF` x¨f¨r§l¤` o¤A oFr§n¦W i¦A¦x .mixEP ¦ Y © 'b x©g©` mi¦x¨t§M©A .min¨ ¦ i 'b x©g©` mi¦k¨x§M©A Epa¦l § ìV© ¦ n dï¨d¤W F` lFc¨B m¨c¨` `¥dÏ¤W Èd§e .dïit£ ¦ `©N¤W zFzÄ©W WŸl¨W x©g©` mi¦YÄ i¥l£r©A§N¤W .min¨ ¦ i 'b x©g©òi¦ x¨t§M©A oi¦nFYg© § p§N¤W Exn«¨ § `¤W§M s©` .xŸFn Ff xg© ©` Ef c¨g¤` zÄ©W§Aoi¦ xEPY © 'b d¨t¨`§e Exn«¨ § `¤W§M s©` .x¥nF` oFrn¦ § W i¦A¦x .i¥P©Y .xŸFn d¤f x©g©` d¤f c¨g¤` mFiA § oi xEP ¦ Y © 'b d¨t¨`§e w©g§c¦p m¦` FzF`Îl¨k§l xFÙ § Fl xxFA ¥ zix£ ¦g©X¦O¤W .mi¦nï 'b c©r xEq¨` .oi¦xEPY © 'b x©g©` oi¦x¨t§M©A oi¦nFYg© § p§N¤W .Wiw¨l ¦ Wix ¥ m¥W§a dï§n§x¦i i¦A¦x x©n¨` .z¤v¤O©g§z¦n x¥zid§ ¥e xEQi`¥ ¦ n `Ÿl dïi¦p§X©d d¨Qir¨ ¦ d D¨zF` .mFI¨d oFzi¦e£d©C Y§§xid¨ ¦ p .`ïi©pFz§p¥r d¨pi¦p£g i¦A¦x§l i¥qEi i¦A¦x x©n¨` .x¤f¤r¦l i¦A¦x .mi¦zEk§N¤W o¨vin¨ ¥g `¨P©Y o`¨n o¨pi¦e£d `¨l o`¨k§e .x¤f¤ri¦l i¦A¦x .mizEM ¦ l¤W o¨vin¨ ¥g `¨P©Y o`¨n .Wiw¨l ¦ Wi¥x m¥W§a dï§n§x¦i i¦A¦x§e Y©§òi x¨ ¦n x©n¨C `¨c¨d¥n cFr§e .x¤f¤ri¦l i¦A¦x§M mi¦zEM l¤W o¨vin¨ ¥g§l Ecx«¨ §i .Wiw¨l ¦ Wi¥x m¥W§a `¨li¦d i¦A¦x `¨N¤òi x¨ ¦n oExFde § i¦Q©A¦x§lE i¦O¦A¦x§lE dïig ¦ i¦A¦x§l l©`¨W g©l¨W .`c§ äFr Di¥l dë£d `Ä©` .EdÄ©` i¦A¦x x©A dï§p©p£g i¦A¦x .x¤f¤ri¦l i¦A¦x§M mi¦zEM l¤W o¨vin¨ ¥g§l Ecx«¨ §I¤W mEW¦n .`Ÿl .oix¨ ¦n d§`§cigi ¦ kE ¦ .dn © .x¤f¤ri¦l i¦A¦x§M D i ¥l R | mizek oving R | ung 2 izni` R | izni`n `cd on R | `cdn xn` xfrl 'x da xn` dn¹R | - 1 R | epal 4 mixtka oinezgplye R | mixtka (always) dyly R | 'b (2x) xg`l R | xg` 3 mizekly R | xg` mikxka R | oixtka sè R | s` df xg` dfe R | - zg` R | cg` mixepz R | oixepz 5 epa z` mixtka R | oixtka 7 df xg` dfe R | - mixepz R | oixepz wgcpy R | wgcp ède R | m` 6 xg`l R | yix xne R | xn` ìd R | - ìipy R | diipyd 8 dxek èd R | xxea mixeq` R | - xg`l R | xg` oa oerny 'x R | yix 10 xn` R | oixn oeziedc ziz` xedp R | zxidp xfril R | xfrl 9 oa oerny 'x oizekly R | mizek ly oa oerny 'x R | yix ok oixn` R | oixn 11 op il R | opied `l opè R | o`ke `qi 'xle R | iqaxle inaxle 'xc dixa R | 'x xa dpipg R | dippg 12 'n`c R | xnc `cd on R | `cdn iixen R | oixen ìicigik R | d`cigike 13 oixeè R | oexede ini` 'xle So far when they fell in one after the other. What can one say if they fell together? Let us hear from the following141: “When is leavened matter of Samaritans permitted after Passover? Of private persons after three weekly bakings, of city bakers after three days, of rural ones after three baking loads.” Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar says, even when they said of private persons after HALAKHAH 11 463 three weekly bakings, if he was an important personality or he married off his son, if he baked three loads in one week one after the other it is permitted. Even when they said of (rural) [city]142 bakers after three days, if he was under pressure and baked three loads one after the other, it is permitted. It was stated: Rebbi Simeon says, even when they said of rural bakers after three baking loads, it is forbidden at least three days since in the morning he prepares sourdough for the entire day.” Does the second dough not become sour from forbidden and permitted? And Rebbi Jeremiah said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, who is the Tanna of “the leavened matter of the Samaritans”? Rebbi Eliezer! And Rebbi Yose said to Rebbi Hanina Eyntanaya: Do you remember that you and Rebbi Jeremiah were instructing in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, who is the Tanna of “the leavened matter of the Samaritans”? Rebbi Eliezer! But here we do not instruct so but Rebbi Hila in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, they treated leavened matter of the Samaritans following Rebbi Eliezer. In addition from the following:: Rebbi Hananiah bar Rebbi Abbahu said, my father had a case; he sent to Rebbi Hiyya, and Rebbi Immi, and Rebbi Yasa, and they instructed him following Rebbi Eliezer. How? Would they instruct following an isolated opinion? No, since they treated leavened matter of the Samaritans following Rebbi Eliezer142. i¦A¦x§k d¨k¨l£d `¨k¨d sE` .x¤f¤ri¦l i¦A¦x§k d¨k¨l£d .oÖ©Y x©n Y©§c d©n§M .i¥qFi i¦A¦x i¥nFw i¦p¨n i¦A¦x x©n¨` .dÄ¦cÎl¨k§lE .Di¥l xn¨ ©` .x¤f¤ri¦l xac R | dac 2 `ke R | `kd se` xnizc dn jid R | xn zc dnk `pn R | ipn 1 Rebbi Mani said before Rebbi Yose: as you are saying there143, “practice follows Rebbi Eliezer”, also here practice follows Rebbi Eliezer. He said to him, for everything144?

140 Tosephta Pesahim 2:1. One may minute amount after Passover. A Samaritan/ assume that as long as other Sadducee sects Sadducee did consider the sale of such were in existence, the same rules applied to matter to a Gentile while the matter was all Sadducees who denied that leavened seen in the Jew’s house on Passover, as a matter which was owned by a Jew during breach of the biblical commandment. Passover (but hidden away so that it was not 141 The text in parentheses (identical with seen, Ex. 13:7) was forbidden in the most that in Òrlah) was originally written by the 464 AVODAH ZARAH CHAPTER FIVE scribe; the text in brackets is his correction. most minute amount? The answer is 142 It is a practice universally accepted negative. (probably by necessity when Sadducees 144 The scribe also wrote dac in Òrlah but were a viable Jewish sect), not a decision there corrected to xac. The form dÄ¦C, incorporated in a consistent theory of the Accadic dibbu, should be acknowledged, but law. it is not clear whether this is learned Hebrew 143 In matters of leavened matter; does this speech or popular Aramaic. apply to all cases of food prohibited in the

[):zHRLyD(DzO])[)UzHG[{ {IG{F)DU| vH.wTwSRLxLRxGw:¡O{0RLy[zT)CzHRL[(Tv y C(1LxC :AI¹DPYN (fol. 44c) (KvJz:y3w:RLy1(JzHD{O{Jw$[{8{D([)QvJ[wKwW([LyI{S[xULy8zHU{[)YzQLx[u5yYzHG{W([UG{ v OzEwUzHO{ZzTy3|G RxGw:¡O{Nz$RLy[zT)CzHRL[(Tv y C(1LxCLx[vGG[{ {IvU{$ Mishnah 12: The following are forbidden and they forbid in the most minute amount:145 Libation wine, idols, heart-removed skins146, and an ox which was stoned147, and the calf whose neck was broken148, and the birds of the sufferer from skin disease149, and the nazir’s hair150, and the firstborn donkey151, and meat in milk152, and profane animals slaughtered in the Temple precinct153. These are forbidden and they forbid in the most minute amount.

145 The rule that anything which cannot be person, Lev. 14:4-6. tasted in a mixture is irrelevant does not 150 Which has to be burned, Num. 6:18. apply to these items. An admixture of one 151 Which is not redeemed by a lamb given of these even if less than one in a thousand to a Cohen, Ex. 13:13. will make everything forbidden. 152 Meat cooked in milk, Ex. 23:19,34:26, 146 Mishnah 2:3. Deut. 14:21. 147 Which killed a human, Ex. 21:28. 153 It is pointed out in the Halakhah that the 148 To atone for an unsolved murder case, biblical text forbids only the slaughter of Deut. 21:1-9. dedicated animals outside the holy precinct, 1498 For purification of the healed Lev. 17:4. oiaEa§l ¦ zFxFr§ed¨ x¨f d¨cFa£r©e K¤q¤p oi¥i .'lek od¤ ¥WÎl¨Moi x§ ¦qFè § oi xEq£ ¦ ` ENi` ¥ :AI¹DKLD 45b line 1 .m¤x®¥g©dÎon ¦ d¨nE`§ †n L§²c«ï§A w¯©A§c¦iÎ`«Ÿle § m¥W lr `Ÿl x©nFl cEn§l©z d©n .l¥k¨`¥i `ŸN¤W r¥©cFi i¦pi` ¥ xFÀX©d l¹w¨¥Q¦i x©n¡`¤P¤W r©n§W©O¦n .l¨w§q¦P©d xFW§e .dïi¨p£d©A s©` xEq¨`¤W o¨Min ¦ .Æl¥k¨`«¥i HALAKHAH 12 465 xEq¨` o`¨M xEn¨`¨d m¨W s©` dïi¨p£d©A xEq¨` o¨N©d§l xEn¨`¨d m¨W d©n .m¨W m¨W .d¨tEx£r d¨l§b¤r .dïi¨p£d©A .dhEg ¨ X© § d d¤f m®¤d¥n E†l§k`ŸzÎ`Ÿl « x¬¤W£` df§ ¾¤ e .dÏ©g©d Ff El«¥k`ŸY dxFd ¨ h § xF¬R¦vÎl¨M .rxFv ¨ n § i¥x¢R¦v§e gEx© FA W¤I¤W xä¨C dïi¨p£d xEQi¦` d¨xFYd © dÜiR§ ¦ z¦d `Ÿl .l`¥r¨n§W¦i i¦A¦x m¥W§A o¨p¨gFi i¦A¦x .sENig ¦ F` .mi¦I©g :mi«¦n¨lX© § d g«©a¬f ¤ zg†© ©YÎxW£ ¤ ` W½¥`¨dÎl©rÆo z¨ © p§e .xi¦f¨p x¥riU§ ¦ e .dïi¨p£d©A xEq¨`§e FxaFw § o¨M s©` dïi¨p£d©A xEq¨`§e FxaFw § o¨N©d§l d©n .d¨tix£ ¦r d¨tix£ ¦r .xFn£g x¤h¤tE .lEXia§lE ¦ dïi¨p£d©l§e d¨li¦k£`©l .i†¦c§B l¬¥X©a§zÎ`«Ÿl aEz¨M zFnFwn § 'bA .i¥P©Y .a¨l¨g¤A xÜäE i¦N¤W§a i¦N¤W hFg§W .d¨xFz d¨x§n«¨` .l`¥r¨n§W¦i i¦A¦x m¥W§A o¨p¨gFi i¦A¦x .dx¨ ¨f£rÄ Eh£g§W¦P¤W oi¦NEge § .xn¨ ©` l`¥r¨n§W¦i i¦A¦x e`¨l§e .z¥x¨M WEp¨r i¦N¤W§A K¨N¤W s©` .xEq¨` K¨N¤W§a i¦N¤W d©n .K¨N¤W§A K¨N¤W§e .xnFg¨ ¤ e l©T¦n oi¦W§pFr oi¥`§e x¤nFgë l©T¦noi ci ¦ n§l ¥ Halakhah 12: “The following are forbidden and they forbid in the most minute amount,” etc. Libation wine, idols, heart-removed skins, because nothing of the taboo should cling to your hand154. An ox which was stoned. From the meaning of what was said, the ox shall be stoned147 would I not know that it cannot be eaten? Why does the verse say, it shall not be eaten? From here that it is forbidden for usufruct155. And the calf whose neck was broken. There, there. Since there mentioned further describes a prohibition of usufruct, also there said here implies prohibition of usufruct156. And the birds of the sufferer from skin disease. Any pure bird you may eat157, this is the living bird. But the following you may not eat of them158, that is the slaughtered one159. Or the other way around? Rebbi Johanan in the name of Rebbi Ismael: The Torah has no prohibition of usufruct which applies to any living thing160. And the nazir’s hair. He shall put it in the fire which is under the well-being offering150,161. And the firstborn donkey. Breaking the neck, breaking the neck. Since there one buries it and it is forbidden for usufruct, also here one buries it and it is forbidden for usufruct162. And meat in milk. It was stated: At three places it is written do not cook a kid goat152, about eating, about usufruct, and about cooking163. 466 AVODAH ZARAH CHAPTER FIVE

And profane animals slaughtered in the Temple precinct. Rebbi Johanan in the name of Rebbi Ismael: The Torah said, slaughter what is Mine in My place153 and what is yours in yours. Since Mine in yours is forbidden, also yours in Mine164. Is it punished by extirpation? Does not Rebbi Ismael say, one infers by an argument de minore ad majus but one does not punish by an argument de minore ad majus165?

154 Deut. 13:18. Sifry Deut. 96. prohibition as food is necessary anyhow to 155 This is a very short reference to a text in show that if the ox was ritually slaughtered `Orlah 3:1 (Notes 26-28, Pesahim 2:1 28c), after conviction by the court, the slaughter is which is part of a lengthy discussion under ineffective and does not permit the carcass which conditions a prohibition as food to be eaten. Everybody agrees that if the ox implies a prohibition of usufruct (`Orlah was correctly slaughtered before a trial 3:1, Notes 10-44; Pesahim 2:1; Babli could be held the meat is kosher. The Babli Pesahim 21b, Qiddušin 56b, Bava qamma has to find the prohibition of usufruct in 41a, Hulin 114b) Since the mention of the another part of the verse which makes the prohibition as food is unnecessary, the ox prohibition one of rabbinic interpretation qualifies as a case where the prohibition as rather than biblical. food means prohibition of usufruct. In the Louis Ginzberg in his Yerushalmi Babylonian sources (Bava qamma 41a, Fragments from the Genizah (New York Mekhilta dR. Ismael Mišpatim 10) it is 1909) p. 280 has published a leaf of agreed that it is obvious that a stoned animal selections from the entire tractate. The was not ritually slaughtered and therefore is passage referring to the paragraph under forbidden as meat but it is noted that the discussion reads there (vocalization added):

`Ÿl x©nFl cEn§l©z d©n .l¥k¨`¥i `Ÿl oi¦r§cFi Ep` ¨ oi¥` i¦k§e l¥w¨Q¦i lFwq ¨ 'py r©n§W©O¦n 'be xFX© À d l¹w¨¥Q¦i l¸Ÿwq ¨ .l¨w§q¦P©d xFW§e . . . Elk`Ÿz § `Ÿl l¥k¨`¥i `Ÿl 'py mFw¨nÎl¨M o¨p¨gFi 'x mW§ ¤ a 'Ä©` 'x .dïi¨p£d©A xEq`§ ©e d¨li¦k£`©A xEq¨` ÈdW ¤ `¨N¤` .Æl¥k¨`«¥i xEq` ¦ And an ox which was stoned. The ox should certainly be stoned. From the meaning of what was said, shall certainly be stoned147 would we not know that it cannot be eaten? Why does the verse say, it shall not be eaten? But that it is forbidden for eating and forbidden for usufruct. Rebbi Abba[hu] in the name of Rebbi Johanan: Any place where it says shall not be eaten, you shall not eat [it is forbidden for eating and forbidden for usufruct.]

The addition to the text is from Òrlah 3:1 Johanan (R. Eleazar’s teacher). The (Note 10) or Pesahim 2:1 l. 15. In these and addition has to be considered a commentary. all Babli sources (quoted above) the 156 Babli 29b, Sifry Deut. 207. This is a statement is attributed to R. Eleazar, not R. case of equal cut. It is written in Deut. 21:4, HALAKHAH 12 467 and they shall break the calf’s neck there in usufruct; since it is a positive commandment the wadi. Also it is written in Num.20:1, to burn the hair in this way, any other use is there Miriam died and was buried there. forbidden (but not sanctionable). Since a grave and all its appurtenances are 162 Babli Bekhorot 9b, Mekhilta dR. Ismael forbidden for usufruct, and since the Bo 18, dR. Simeon bar Iohai 13:13 (l. 25). mention of there in Deut. 21:4 is not This is heqqeš rather than “equal cut”. logically necessary, the prohibition of Since the only other case where the neck of usufruct (and, as noted in the Babylonian a four-legged animal has to be broken is the sources, the obligation of burial) is atonement for an unsolved murder case, the transferred to the calf. rules of the latter have to be applied to the 157 Deut. 14:11. case where a rancher refuses to redeem the 158 Deut. 14:12. first born of his donkey. Since the rule has 159 Sifry Deut. 103, Babli Qiddušin 57a, moral justification in the parallel sources, Hulin 82a. Since first it is said, any pure “he refused to give value to the Cohen; bird you may eat, which is immediately therefore value has to be denied him”, the followed by but the following you may not rule has to be considered rabbinic rather eat of them, this implies that not only may than biblical. one not eat the impure birds listed later but 163 Babli Hulin 115b, Qiddušin 57b; also some pure birds. Of the two pure birds Mekhilta dR. Ismael Mišpatim 20 (opposed used for the purification ceremony of the by Mekhilta dR. Simeon ben Iohai 23:19, healed sufferer from skin disease, one is Sifry Reèh 104). slaughtered (Lev. 14:5). The other is 164 Babli Qiddušin 57b where the argument released (v. 7); since it is nor recognizable it if found unconvincing and other proofs are cannot be forbidden to anybody who might given. catch it. Therefore the slaughtered bird must be the one pure bird which was 165 Cf. Yebamot 11:1 Note 50. There is no correctly slaughtered and nevertheless is argument de minore ad majus involved here; forbidden as food. The parallel sources also more appropriate is the language of the presuppose that the remains of the Babli (Sanhedrin 54a, Makkot 5b,14a,17a): slaughtered bird, after its blood has benn One does not punish by a logical argument used, is forbidden for usufruct but no (only by an explicit verse). One cannot explicit reason for that is given. One must object that extirpation anyhow is a matter assume that this is one of the cases where a for the Heavenly Court not bound by human prohibition as food implies prohibition of arguments since offenses punishable by usufruct (cf. Note 155). extirpation automatically are punishable by 160 Babli Qiddušin 57a, opposed there by flogging by the human court. The exclusion R. Simeon ben Laqish. of extirpation implies removal of the offense 161 Using the hair as fuel is a kind of from human criminal justice. 468 AVODAH ZARAH CHAPTER FIVE xä¨C `¨N¤` i¥p§z©n `Ÿl .oEA i¦A¦xi¥A i¥qFi i¦A¦x x©n¨` .o¤dÖ¦r d¨li¥a§p o¨pi¦P©z `Ÿl dÖ¨l§e (45b line 16) oi` ¥ ENi`§ ¥e z¥x¨k FA W¥i u¥n¨g .g©q¤R©A u¥n¨g i¥x£d .oFaiz¨ ¦ d .dïi¨p£d©A z¤x¤YEn d¨li¥a§p .dïi¨p©d©A xEq¨`¤W .zx¨ ¥M o¤dÄ Why did we not state carcasses with them166? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, it did state only things forbidden for usufruct. Carcass meat is permitted for usufruct167. They objected, is there not leavened matter on Passover168? Leavened matter makes liable to extirpation169, but for these170 there is no extirpation.

166 Carcass meat as meat forbids only if it 168 Here again one only considers loaves of 1 can be tasted, i. e., if it is more than /60 in a bread which exclusively are sold by the mixture. Therefore the question must be piece and therefore cannot become about entire carcasses which usually are sold insignificant. by the piece; nothing usually sold by the 169 Ex. 12:15 (but only for eating, not for piece can become insignificant (`Orlah 3:6, possession. Terumot 10:6; Babli Besah 3b). 170 The prohibited items enumerated in the 167 Deut. 14:21. Mishnah.

.[sExih§ ¥ A] (sExi¥v§A) Elh¨ § A¦I¤W Ed¨n dïi¨p£d i¥xEQi` ¦ .i¥rä d¨pi¦p£g i¦A¦x m¥W§a i¥qFi i¦A¦x (45b line 19) o¨pi¦P©z¨d§e .oi x¢ ¦RiS© ¦ A xFRiS ¦ xŸ§tiY ¦ .d¨ xFvn § i¥ x¢RiS ¦ o¨pi¦P©z¨d§e .zFkiz£ ¦ g©A x¨z§t¦Y .l©w§q¦P©d xFU o¨pi¦P©z¨d§e .iqFi ¥ i¦A¦x i¥nFw aŸw£r©i i¦A¦x ai¦z¨dd¨l§ x¨r§l oEH©n c©M .oi¦x¢RiS© ¦ A xFRiS ¦ x©nin ¥ K¨l zi¦` .xi¦f¨p x¥riU ¥ w¥lC¦i ¨ w©V©A xFn£g x¤h¤R¦n xi¦f¨P©d x¥riû¦ ¦ nE .c¤b¤A©d w¥l¨C¦i xFk§A x¤n¤S¦n hi¦Q©d `Ÿl§n b¥xF`d ¨ o¨pi¦P©z¨d§e .zE`§i z©aid¨ ¦ iizi § ` ¦ oÖ©w `¨P©Y x©n£` ENi¦` .Di¥l xn£ ©` .w©û©d Rebbi Yose asked in the name of Rebbi Hanina: May prohibitions of usufruct become insignificant in (combination) [by being shredded]171? But did we not state “the ox which was stoned”? Explain it in pieces172. But did we not state “the birds of the sufferer from skin disease”? Explain it as a bird among birds173. But did we not state “the nazir’s hair”? Can you say a bird among birds174? When they came to study Òrlah did Rebbi Jacob object before Rebbi Yose, did we not state175, “if somebody weaves the length of a sit of firstling’s wool, the cloth must be burned. Of nazir’s hair or firstling donkey in sackcloth, the sackcloth must be burned.” He told him, (if the Tanna had said before us, you would have given)176 correctly. HALAKHAH 13 469

171 The text in parentheses is the original piece (Note 166) does not apply. Here also text written by the scribe, printed in the the prohibition of usufruct is secondary; the editio princeps and the editions based on the question can arise only if the positive latter. The text in brackets is a correction by commandment of burning the hair in the fire the scribe himself. cooking the well-being offering has not been In both cases the question is whether followed. prohibitions of usufruct automatically imply 175 Mishnah Òrlah 3:3. Since a minimum the impossibility of disregarding minute length of a sit (Òrlah 3:3 Note 82) is amounts or whether the prohibition will be required, it is obvious that the prohibition of void if either the prohibited item is mixed the nazir’s hair does not apply to minute with sufficiently many permitted items and amounts. is no longer recognizable or whether it 176 The text as written here can be reverts to the usual test of giving taste if translated word for word but does not make shredded and mixed with others. any sense. It is a corruption of a text in 172 The question is legitimate for meat from Òrlah 3:3 (Note 94): such an ox. This question then reads sexih. zi` ¦ oÖ©Y zäŸ§i¦` ENi` ¦ 173 A slaughtered small bird among many zE`§i zëe£d: If you had objected there you of the same kind. Here one has to read sexiv. would have been correct, i. e., if when I 174 This is the one genuine question since asked the question in Avodah zarah about hair is not sold by the unit; therefore the prohibitions of usufruct becoming rabbinic prohibition of usufruct for insignificant you pointed out the Mishnah in admixtures of forbidden things sold by the Òrlah it would have been relevant.

[xQ)COxCLyOzQ|%Rw$R)UzQy:R{$|[G{LL{SvG|$[(T{C)1(0[)$|OO|W{3w:.wTwSRLxL :BI¹DPYN (fol. 44c) )$:x,w:.wTwSRLxLLxQz&yQX(JL)EzO)1(0[xN{2yL Mishnah 13: If libation wine fell into a cistern, the entire cistern is forbidden for usufruct. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, all of it shall be sold to a Gentile except for the value of libation wine contained in it177.

177 If the wine is sold by volume, the cistern which would make the wine kosher Gentile shall not be required to pay for the to drink. According to Rabban Simeon ben volume of libation wine contained in the Gamliel the prohibition of usufruct does not cistern. Libation wine cannot become extend to the mixture. insignificant; there is no volume of the 470 AVODAH ZARAH CHAPTER FIVE

K¤q¤p oi¥i .dxi¥ ¨ z§A o¤A m¥W§a o¨p¨gFi i¦A¦x i¥qFi i¦A¦x .'lek xFA©l l©t¨P¤W K¤q¤p oi¥iBI¹DKLD 45b line 25 d¨k¨l£d .`¨n¨g i¦A¦x m¥W§A o¨z¨p x©A l¥ÈnW § i¦A¦x .K¤q¤p o¦i©i i¥n§C¦n uEg iFb§l FNEM x¥kÖi¦i xFA©l lt¨ ©P¤W i¦A¦x oFb§N©R§z¦` .x©n£` .`¨c£r©ee zi¥A¦n w©t§p oi¦pÄ©x c©g .`¨qï i¦A¦x x©n¨` .l¥ì¦l§n©B o¤A oFrn¦ § W oÄ©x§k oÄ©x§k d¨k¨l£d oi¥` .x©n¨` c©g§e .l¥ì¦l§n©B o¤A oFr§n¦W oÄ©x§k d¨k¨l£d .x©n¨` c©g .Wiw¨l ¦ Wi¥x§e o¨p¨gFi .ax © m¥W§a oEA iA¦ ¦ x .xEq¨` ÈdW ¤ liW§ ¦ a©z§l o¦i©i§A l¥ì¦l§n©B o¤AoFr§ n¦W oÄ©x d¤cFnE .lì¦l§ ¥ n©B o¤A oFrn¦ § W K¤q¤p o¦i©i i¥n§C¦n uEg iFb§l FNEM x¥kÖi¦l zFI¦a¨g oi¥A zi¦a¨g§A l¥ì¦l§n©B o¤A oFrn¦ § W oÄ©x§l min¨ ¦ k£g oi¦cFn `¨l .oM ¥ EC oir§ ¦ cFi o¨pie£ §d `¨l `¨z§Nin ¦ `¨c¨d z©xÖ©¨`§z¦` `¨l§C c©r .iO¦ ¦ A¦x i¥nFw `xi¥ ¨ f i¦A¦x x©n¨` .FA¤W i¥cFn `¨N¤` z©xÖ©¨`§z¦` `¨l `¨n§lic ¦ F` .l¥ì¦l§n©B o¤A oFr§n¦W oÄ©x§l min¨ ¦ k£g oi¦cFn `¨N¤` z©xÖ©¨`§z¦` r©n§W¦C W©Pi`§ ¦ k `¨N¤` o¥k Ec `¨xir§ ¦ f i¦A¦x dë£d r©c§i .o¨cEi iA¦ ¦ x x©n¨` .min¨ ¦ k£g©l l¥ì¦l§n©B o¤A oFrn¦ § W oÄ©x .D¨N£r d¤W§w©nE d¨Ni¦n Halakhah 13: “If libation wine fell into a cistern,” etc. Rebbi Yose, Rebbi Johanan in the name of ben Bathyra: If libation wine fell into a cistern, all of it shall be sold to a Gentile except for the value of libation wine178. Rebbi Samuel bar Nathan in the name of Rebbi Hama: practice follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel179. Rebbi Yasa said, one of the rabbis came out from the house of assembly and said, Rebbi Johanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagree. One said, practice follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel, and one said, practice does not follow Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel, but Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel agrees that as wine for cooking it is forbidden180. Rebbi Bun in the name of Rav: The Sages agree with Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel if it was an amphora among amphoras that all of it shall be sold to a Gentile except for the value of libation wine181. Rebbi Zeìra said before Rebbi Immi: Before this was said did we not know that it was so182? Was it said that the Sages agree with Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel, or perhaps was only said that Rabban Gamliel agrees with the Sages? Rebbi Yudan said, Rebbi Zeìra knew that it was so, but he is like a person who hears something and objects to it183.

178 The lenient ruling of Rabban Simeon 180 As explained in Note 177, even for ben Gamliel is a traditional Babylonian one. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel libation wine 179 In the Babli, 74a, this is a ruling of the remains forbidden even in the most minute prestigious Rav Nahman. Here it is quoted amount; it is only that the mixture does not in the name of obscure authorities because it entirely become forbidden for all usufruct. is not unquestionable. 181 This is Rav’s interpretation of Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel’s ruling in the Babli HALAKHAH 14 471

74a. If an amphora in a storage facility with 182 That even a person rejecting the opinion at least two other amphoras was of Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel could agrees contaminated with libation wine and it can with the ruling. no longer be identified, all amphoras can be 183 He does not question that practice sold to Gentiles since for each single one the follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel in all probability that it was the forbidden one is cases, also of a single cistern or a single less than 50% which makes the sale amphora, following Samuel in the Babli acceptable by biblical standards. 74a. He only makes it clear that this is a practical ruling without theoretical underpinning.

Dx%|SzL[Q)CLy x $y[XxUOw:zHG{[)GzKCLyGzH'{Dz%|SzQL)%'{]z

184 If the wine press is hewn into the local that first everything has to be washed down limestone, the walls of the vat under the with water for an extended period. The press into which the pressed juice flows Babli specifies that in washing down an have to be made impermeable. If this is abrasive powder has to be used. done by sealing with pitch, something has to 185 Since wood is more absorbent than be done that the pitch does not spoil the stone, a new insulation has to be applied. wine. The usual way of neutralizing the 186 Pottery absorbs the wine; the walls of pitch was to wash it down with wine. The the vat become forbidden and cannot be Yerushalmi does not specify how the wiping repaired (except by standing empty for 12 dry has to be done, probably because it was months, by which time all organic material generally known, but the Halakhah implies will have decomposed.)

.a¥B©p§i .x¥nF` i¦A¦x u¥r§N¤W .i¦A¦x§C oi¦zi¦p§z©n .'lek iFB D¨z§R¦G¤W o¤a¤`§N¤W z©B :CI¹DKLD (45b line 37) .iFb§N¤W K¥R§W©O©d§e u©g©O©d§e z©B©d .i¥P©z§C .i¦A¦x§k `Ÿl§Cq¤ x¤g§N¤W§e .z¤t¤G©d z¤` sFlw¦i § .mi x§ ¦nF` min¨ ¦ k£g©e ENi`§ ¥e oi¦xEq£` ENi¥` d©n i¥p§R¦nE .zFxEq£`¤W mi¦p¨w§p©T©A i¦A¦x d¤cFn .(mix§ ¦nF`) min¨ ¦ k£g©e xi¦Y©n i¦A¦x i¥l§M .i¦A¦x§k d¨k¨l£d .o¨p¨gFi i¦A¦x m¥W§a i¥qeI i¦A¦x .K¨k§l o¨q¦p§k©n oi¥` ENi¥`§e K¨k§l o¨q¦p§k©n ENi` ¥ .oix¨ ¦YEn .i¥P©z§C .min¨ ¦ k£g©e i¦A¦x z¤wFl£g©n .i¦A¦x§M d¨k¨l£d .l¥ÈnW § m¥W§A oEA iA¦ ¦ x¥A i¥qFi i¦A¦x .iFB oŸ§t¦G¤W xïiR© ¦ R l¤w¤r¨d§e .oi¦xFdhE § oä§B©p©n d¨X©c£r¨d§e oi¦R©C©d§e oi¦a¨lENd © .D¨x£d©h§l W¥T©a§nE d¨ìn§ ¥h FYi¦b d¨z§i«¨d 472 AVODAH ZARAH CHAPTER FIVE oÄ©x .WcFg ¤ xÜ¨r mi¥p§WÎl¨M o¨p§X©iin § i¦n¨b§l¤W oi¦hEg§N¤W d¨tiW§N¤ ¦ W u¥r§N¤W§e hEAh¦ § a§N¤W§e oi¦x¨v§p¦N¤W d¨v¨x m¦` .l¥ì¦l§n©B o¤A oFrn¦ § W oÄ©x x©n¨` .i¥P©Y .z©b§l z©B¦nE c©a§l c©A¦n .x¥nF` l¥ì¦l§n©B o¤A oFr§n¦W a¥B©p§n Y©§`¤W m¥W§M .d¨pFr ic§ ¥M oi¦k§N©d§n ei¨niO¤ ¥W x¨d¨p§A F` oig§N© ¦ w§n ei¨niO¤ ¥W xFPi¦v§A o¥zFp cÏ¦n o¨x£d©h§l i¦v£g©e .mFi iv£ ¦ g .x¥nF` o¨p¨gFi i¦A¦x m¥W§a i¥qeI i¦A¦x .d¨pFr ìd ¦ dÖ©M .K¤q¤p oi¥i§A a¥B©p§n K¨M zFx¢d¨h§A oi`¤ ¥W o`¨k§e oi¦e¨W d¨l§i©N©d§e mFId¤ ©W o`¨M `¨N¤` .bi¦l§tE dn © .d¨l§i©l F` mFi F` .dïig ¦ i¦A¦x i¥P©Y .d¨l§i©l .oi¦e¨W d¨l§i©N©d§e mFId © Halakhah 14: “A wine press of stone which a Gentile had pitched,” etc. Our Mishnah is Rebbi’s. “One of wood, Rebbi said he shall wipe it dry but the Sages say he must remove the pitch.” For pottery it is not following Rebbi, as it was stated187: A Gentile’s wine-press, bucket, and funnel, Rebbi permits but the Sa (say)188. Rebbi agrees that pitchers are forbidden. Why are these forbidden and those permitted? These one fills with it, the others one does not fill with it189. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Johanan: practice follows Rebbi190. If a Gentile pitched a papyrus vessel191. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Samuel, practice follows Rebbi192. It is the disagreement of Rebbi and the Sages, as we have stated193: “If somebody’s wine-press was impure194 and he wants to purify it, the brooms, the planks, and the lentil195 one rubs dry and they are pure. The wicker-work of wood splinters, or of hemp, or of wood, or of bark, of threads, of bast, one lets age a full twelve months; Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said, from one olive pressing to the next, from one wine pressing to the next196. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said197, if he wants to purify it immediately, he puts it for a period in a pipe where water streams, or in a brook whose water flows. Just as one wipes dry for purity198 so one wipes dry for libation wine.” How much is a period? Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Johanan, half a day or half a night. Rebbi Hiyya stated, either a day or a night. Do they disagree? But one when day and night are equal, the other when day and night are unequal199.

187 Babli 74b. A comparison with the text has to read mix§ ¦qF` “forbid”. What Rebbi of the Babli shows that the text here is permits and the Sages forbid is cleansing the elliptic. It must read: The Mishnah follows earthenware vessels by wiping them dry. Rebbi for stone and wood vessels, but does 189 The text of the Babli is more explicit: not follow Rebbi for pottery. In pitchers wine is stored, in other vessels it 188 It is obvious that for mix§ ¦nF` “say” one is filled only temporarily. HALAKHAH 14 473

190 The Babli does not discuss which with the building. opinion to follow but, since at other places it 195 Any ovaloid implement is called states the rule that practice follows Rebbi “lentil”; this may be a vessel (a hot water only if his opinion is opposed by a single bottle, Tosephta Šabbat 3:7) or a roller. dissenter, not against a majority opinion, the 196 If one has to wait a full 12 months one codifiers of Talmudic law follow the Sages loses the use of the press for one full in this matter. harvest. 191 Not paper cups but wicker work made 197 In the Babylonian sources, Babli and with papyrus rope or stems; cf. Kilaim 6:3 Tosephta: Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel in Note 38. The discussion is interrupted by the name of R. Yose. the next sentence; it continues with “is the 198 Even though one uses the expression disagreement . . .” “to make the wine in purity” as equivalent to 192 There is Babylonian authority for “making kosher wine” (Halakhah 4:12), following Rebbi; cf. Note 190. here one speaks of purity in the exact 193 Tosephta 8:3, Babli 75a. biblical meaning. 194 Nothing connected to the ground can be 199 Babli 75a, Pesahim 113b, Yebamot 62b, impure except a leprous house. One speaks Ševuot 18b, Niddah 63b. Either day or night here of the movable parts and the at the equinox or half a day during the implements belonging to a wine-press which summer solstice, half a night during the in a standard sale contract would be sold winter solstice.

OLyUzE|LOLyUzE|GzOOLy$zK|LOLy$zK|GzO)0[| z&w:]wCL)%|GRyQ:LyQz:|]LxOz0|JxZ)1|G :EH¹DPYN¹¹fol. 44c G[)Gz { KCLyGzH'{W{:RLy0|4|GzH[(C{$R{Sz$|OzQG{O{NzTwC{GzHF(Wz;|GRx$|OzL[(C{$Rx$|OzO Mishnah 15: If somebody buys crockery200 from a Gentile, what usually is immersed one immerses201, cleansed in boiling water one cleanses in boiling water, making glowing white in fire one makes glowing white202. The spit and the grill203 one makes glowing white in fire but a knife one rubs clean204 and it is pure.

200 Any vessels and utensils used for the cleansing kosher vessels from leavened preparation or serving of food. matter for Passover and discussed in 201 The basic source is Num. 31:21-23. If Tractate Pesahim. As a general principle, the item has not been used for non-kosher what was used only cold simply has to be food and is of metal, it is immersed in water. cleansed, what was used with hot fluids 202 The rules for cleansing vessels from must be cleansed with boiling water, and non-kosher food are identical with those for what was used in the fire must be exposed to 474 AVODAH ZARAH CHAPTER FIVE fire. pushes it three times into hard soil. This 203 Greek dó÷Üñá, with change of the should eliminate all fat particles clinging to liquid. the knife. 204 As explained in the Halakhah, one iFBd © o¦n Wi¦n§W©z i¥l§M g¥©wFNd © .'lek iFBd © o¦n Wi¦n§W©z i¥l§M g¥©wFNd © :EH¹DKLD 45b line 53 miO¨ ¦ w§nFwe § zFxFi lä£` .oi¦xFdhE § o¨giC© ¦n zFqFM oFbM § W¤t¤p l¤kF` o¤dÄ oi¦UFrW ¤ r¥©cFIW ¤ mi¦xä§C ENi` ¥ i¥x£d o¥Ai¦l§e s¨W§e lir§ ¦ b¦d§e liA§ ¦ h¦d `ŸN¤W i¦R l©r s©` o¤dÄ W¥O©Y§W¦P¤W o¨NEk§e .oi¦O©g©A o¨li¦r§b©n `Ÿ§n©g§l `ïiU§p ¦ o¨cEi i¦A¦x m¦r w©l§q i¦O¦A¦x .`¨c¨d§M .li¦A§h©d§l Kix¨ ¦v .`ï§r©WFd i¦A¦x i¥P©Y .oi¦xFdh § E`v«¨ § I¤W i¦t§l li¦A§h©d§lKi x¨ ¦v .x©n¨` dï§n§x¦i i¦A¦x§l oFl£`¨W .qEpiqF` ¦ C § oi¥Ni¦` o¦n s©q§k oFl£`¨W§e x¥c¨b§c `¨g¨` x©A aŸw£r©i i¦A¦x oFrn«¨ § W§e oFwt© § p .cnlpe uegl `vi .l`¨ ¥x§U¦i z©XEcw§¦l § Eq §pk¦p§ § e iFBd © z©`§nEHn ¦ i¦A¦x .mi¦l¥k Elit£ ¦ ` dŸ©r¥n .xŸEn l¥ÈW lä£` .©g¥wFl `¨N¤` EpW ¨ `Ÿl .o¨p¨gFi iA¦ ¦ x m¥W§a `Ä x©A oFrn¦ § W .o¨liA§ ¦ h©nE mi¦l¥M oi¦a§f `ï§r©WFd i¥lEri ¦b§a Èd xnFg ¤ .oiO© ¦ g©A o¨li¦r§b©n .x©n¨` Y©` `¨kë .oi¦xFdh § o¥d§e o¨giC© ¦n .x©n¨` Y©` `¨k¨d .m¦iFB .d¨P©h§w oi¦M©q§A x©ni¥z§c `¨c¨d .d¨cEd§i a©x m¥W§a `Ä i¦A¦x .Fiic§ ©e min¨ ¦ r§t 'b ux¨ ¤`Ä Dä§kFY oiM© ¦ q .EPO¦ ¤ n oi¦f§Y©p§n zFvFSi¦p Ed§I¤WKi x¨ ¦v oEAi¦N©d§e .oEAi¦l d¨kix§ ¦v d¨lFc§B oiM© ¦ q§A lä£` Halakhah 15: “If somebody buys crockery from a Gentile,” etc. “205If somebody buys crockery from a Gentile, something of which he knows that it is used for human food, he washes them clean and they are pure. But pots and boiling kettles206 one cleanses in boiling water. All of these, if he used them even if he did not immerse them, or cleansed them in boiling water, or rubbed them clean, or made them glowing white in fire, they are pure.” Rebbi Hoshaia said, one has to immerse them207, as by the following. Rebbi Immi and Rebbi Jehudah the Prince went down to the hot springs of Gadara208 and borrowed silverware from the family Osinos209. They asked Rebbi Jeremiah who said, one must immerse them because they left the impurity of Gentiles and entered the holiness of Israel210. He went out and we want to learn211. They left and heard Rebbi Jacob bar Aha, Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Johanan: they said only “who buys”, but the borrower is permitted212. Then even vessels213. Rebbi Hoshaia bought vessels and immersed them214. Here you say, one washes them clean and they are pure. But there you say, one cleanses them in boiling water. One is more stringent with the abominations of Gentiles215. HALAKHAH 15 475

A knife one sticks into the ground three times and it is enough216. Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Jehudah: That is for a small knife. But a large knife needs to become white hot, and in its being white hot it is necessary that sparks fly from it217.

205 Babli 75b, Tosephta 8:2. In these texts, sentence was c©n§l¦p§e uEg©l `¥v¥p “let us go out the formulation is much more clear. If a and study.” vessel is new, one simply immerses it. If it 212 In the Babli, loc. cit., a statement of R. was used cold like cups, one washes them Nahman (bar Jacob). clean. If it was used hot or for cooking, it 213 New earthenware vessels, not covered has to be cleansed by boiling water. by reference to Num. 31:21-24. 206 Latin cucuma. 214 As a matter of practice, not theoretical 207 One has to immerse any vessel bought obligation. from a Gentile to convert it to a Jewish vessel. In the Babli (Note 205) this is one 215 It is difficult to make sense of this version of the preceding baraita; another passage. Most probably the explanation of version denies the obligation. Pene Moshe is correct that the Mishnah here 208 The place were calendar computations requires that spit and grill be cleansed in fire and proclamations were held and all leading whereas in Mishnah Zevahim 11:7 it is only scholars of the time came together. The required that spit and grill used in the names of persons involved here are probably Temple be cleaned by boiling water. The corrupt. R. Immi cannot ask for instruction answer is that while the cleansing of the from R. Jeremiah, the student of his utensils in the Temple is a biblical colleagues R. Yasa’s student R. Ze`ira. requirement (Lev. 6:21) the rabbinic 209 From the context it appears that these requirement of cleansing from forbidden were Gentiles. cooking follows rules that are more strict. 210 This opinion is not found in any other 216 In the Babli, 76b, ten times in hard source. ground, and only for a knife without 211 While the meaning of the sentence is clear, the text is corrupt and cannot be depressions. vocalized to make sense as it stands. The 217 The Babli, loc. cit., makes a difference people who asked R. Jeremiah did not between a knife used for cold food which accept his ruling, they decided to look can be cleansed in the ground and one used around for other opinions. Possibly then the hot which needs cleansing in boiling water.