Previous daf

1)

(a) The Beraisa permits new skin flasks of Nochrim that have not been overlaid with pitch - because they have not yet had a chance to absorb the wine that they contain.

(b) This concession - does not extend to earthenware jars, which begin to absorb immediately.

(c) The Beraisa - forbids however, old flasks or new ones that have been overlaid with pitch.

(a) The Beraisa discusses a case where a Nochri overlaid leather flasks with pitch and immediately poured in the wine - because wine that is poured into the flask whilst the pitch is still hot, improves the wine which adopts the sharp taste of the pitch.

(b) The Tana permits the wine - provided a Yisrael oversees the process.

(c) We object to this leniency however - but it does not seem to make sense to permit wine that the Nochri pours in himself, even if a Yisrael oversees the process.

(d) Rav Papa therefore amends the Beraisa to read - that it is the Yisrael who pours in the wine after the Nochri has poured the pitch.

(a) Even though it is the Yisrael who pours in the wine, one needs a second Yisrael to oversee the procedure - because otherwise we are afraid that the Nochri will take advantage of the fact that the Yisrael is busy pouring out the wine, and render the wine Yayin Nesech.

(b) Rav Z'vid re-establishes the Beraisa as it was presented, and nevertheless, the Tana permits the wine on the basis of the Yisrael who is overseeing - because the wine that becomes absorbed in the cask, goes completely to waste (like pouring water into mud [see Ritva]).

(c) Rav Papi extrapolates from Rav Z'vid's ruling - that if a Nochri pours wine into a vessel containing salt, the salt is permitted (because it has gone completely to waste).

(d) Rav Ashi refutes Rav Papi's proof however - on the grounds that (unlike the case of the pitch, where the wine disappears and dries up) the wine in the salt remains intact, seeing as a. it never dries up, and b. it gives taste to the salt.

(a) bar Adi was a Nochri ...

(b) ... who forced Rebbi Yitzchak bar Yosef to give him his leather flasks, which he filled with wine, and later returned.

(c) Rebbi Yirmiyah quoting Rebbi Ami ruled - that Rebbi Yitzchak bar Yosef would have to fill the flasks with water for three days (in order to be permitted to use the flasks), and pour the water out (a process known as 'Shtelling').

(d) Rava added - that he had to change the water after each twenty-four hour period.

(a) When Ravin arrived from Eretz Yisrael, he quoted Resh Lakish - who extended this ruling even to a case where the flask belonged to the Nochri to begin with (even though it would have absorbed far more wine).

(b) Rav Acha b'rei de'Rava thought that perhaps the lenient ruling is restricted to skin flasks, but not to earthenware casks - because earthenware tends to absorb a lot and do not exude all that they absorb.

(c) Rav Ashi told him - that earthenware casks in this regard, have the same Din as skin flasks.

(a) The basic Halachah of 'Shtelling' earthenware wine-jars of Nochrim in water is taught in a Beraisa. The Tana dispenses with the need for Shtelling, permitting the jars to be used immediately - if one uses them for fish-juice or fish-hash (whose sharpness quickly dispel any wine that the jars have absorbed.

(b) We ask whether this applies even Lechatchilah, or only Bedi'eved (permitting the fish juice ... that he already poured into the cask. Rav Z'vid bar Oshaya answers with a Beraisa - which specifically permits it even Lechatchilah.

7)

(a) When Rebbi Yehudah Nesi'ah asked Rebbi Ami whether returning the wine-casks to the furnace would suffice to permit them, he replied - that if fish-juice burned up the wine, then how much more so, the heat of a furnace.

(b) Rebbi Yochanan (according to one version, quoted by Rebbi Asi) concurs with this ruling.

(c) In fact, he permits the jars as soon as the pitch falls off from the heat. Rav Ashi maintains - that what Rebbi Yochanan means is that it is sufficient for it to come loose.

(d) We ask what the Din will be if one heats the jars by placing boiling hot rods inside them, until the pitch falls off. This might not be as good as returning them to the furnace - because seeing as the pitch is inside the jars together with the rods, it will require a lesser temperature to remove it, than would have been required had one returned them to the furnace, where the heat would have had to loosen the pitch from the outside of the jars.

(a) Rav Acha and Ravina argue over the previous case. The Halachah is -Asur.

(b) We learn from here - that one cannot Kasher barrels or jars that were used for storing wine, by pouring boiling water into them (since hot water is certainly no better than fire).

(c) Rav Nachman and Rav Yehudah forbid using the barrels even for beer, unless they have been Kashered. Nevertheless, Ravina permitted Rav Chiya b'rei de'Rav Yitzchak to use them for beer, like the opinion of Rava. The latter (in error) subsequently - used them for storing wine.

(d) Why did Ravina not decree against using the jars for beer - because, he claimed, that was a chance error that would not recur.

(a) When Rav Yitzchak bar Bisna filled jars made of earthenware and animal dung that had been used with Yayin Nesech, and placed them in the sun - they broke.

(b) Rebbi Aba commented - that Rav Yitzchak had lost his jars quite unnecessarily, since it was not necessary to place in the sun.

(c) Rebbi Yossi bar Avin translated 'K'lei Neser' as receptacles made of alum. Rebbi Yusna stated - that they cannot be Kashered.

(a) The men of Parzak Rufila took by force earthenware casks that were not used for storage from Pumbedisa, and later returned them. 'Rufila' means - second to the king (viceroy).

(b) Rav Yehudah ruled - that, since these vessels were not used for storage, they only needed to be rinsed with cold water.

(c) Rav Avira - issued the identical ruling with regard to those barrels of red clay that one obtained from Nochrim, (even assuming that they *were* used for storage) ...

(d) ... as did Rav Papi regarding 'Pasvasa de'Bei Michsi' - earthenware vessels that come from an area where the clay is hard (and which do therefore not absorb much).

(a) Rav Asi requires earthenware cups to be Kashered, Rav Ashi does not. They argue in a case where a Yisrael drank from the cup for the first time, and it is from the second time and onwards that the Nochri drank from it; but if the latter were to drink from it the first time, then even Rav Ashi would agree with Rav Asi - because since the cup is soft (presumably we mean that it is made from thin clay) it absorbs easily.

(b) The second Lashon, which is Halachah, takes a more stringent line - requiring Kashering even after the second time according to both opinions.

(c) Rav Z'vid permits a black or white earthenware vessel covered with lead (see also Tosfos DH 'Kunya') - but not a green one, which absorbs more.

(d) He will require even a black or white earthenware vessel which are covered with lead to be Kashered - in the event that they have cracks.

(a) Mereimar is more lenient than Rav Z'vid - permitting even a green earthenware vessel without Kashering it.

(b) They asked Mereimar about having to Kasher these same vessels with regard to Pesach. The She'eilah does not pertain - to green vessels (even if they are smooth) because the alum that they contain, absorbs a lot and is therefore never subject to Kashering, as we learned earlier.

(c) Mereimar replied - that he had seen them exuding, in which case they need to be Kashered.

(d) Mereimar will reconcile his stringent ruling by Chametz with his lenient ruling by Yayin Nesech - by establishing the former by vessels that are used with hot, and the latter, by vessels that are used with cold.

(e) He did not answer that, whereas Chametz on Pesach is d'Oraysa, S'tam Yeinam is only de'Rabbanan - because of the principle 'Kol de'Tikun, Ke'ein d'Oraysa Tikun' (the specification of the Rabbanan's Takanos are similar to to the Torah law). Consequently, since the Chachamim forbade Yayin Nesech, they would have also given it the same specifications as if it was d'Oraysa.