Avodah Zarah 30b — the Talmud in English

From here

from the third day

and onward, it contains neither the prohibition of uncovered liquid nor the prohibition of yayin nesekh,

since it is entirely spoiled.

And the Nehardeans,

the sages of Nehardea,

say

they say:

even after three days

after three days,

we are concerned

that there is cause for concern

because of uncovered liquid.

What is the reason? —

Sometimes it happens that it drinks,

sometimes the snake nevertheless drinks from it.

The Sages taught: Fermenting wine

new wine that has just been pressed from the grapes and has not yet reached the status of wine is called “fermenting wine,” and

it contains no

prohibition

of uncovered liquid.

And how long

does its fermentation last, until it becomes wine? —

Three days!

And likewise,

the shĕḥalim

a type of plant that is crushed and ground, and is mixed with water or wine,

contain no

prohibition

of uncovered liquid. And

indeed,

the people of the Exile —

adopted a prohibition concerning them.

And we said this

we did not say this matter, that they adopted a prohibition concerning them,

except when there is no vinegar in them,

when in these shĕḥalim there is no vinegar, but only water or wine.

But if there is vinegar in them,

there is vinegar in them,

it irritates them.

The vinegar “irritates” and repels the palate of the snakes, and distances them from the beverage.

And for this reason, it contains no prohibition of uncovered liquid.

And likewise,

Babylonian kuttaḥ

a sharp food like vinegar,

contains no

prohibition

of uncovered liquid. And the people of the Exile —

adopted a prohibition concerning it.

Rav Manshi said: If there are snake marks in it,

if there are in the Babylonian kuttaḥ marks in the form of a snake’s bite,

we are concerned.

There is concern that the snake ate from it.

Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi said that Shmuel said: Drip-drip water,

drops that dripped into a vessel beneath the barrel —

contains no

prohibition

of uncovered liquid

and the reason is explained below.

Rav Ashi said: And this is so

the permission to drink from this dripping applies when

it makes a drip alongside a drip

the drops drip frequently, and the snake hears the continuous dripping and flees!

Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi said that Shmuel said: The mouth of a fig

when the fig is plucked from the tree, a sort of small mouth is formed for it in place of the stem,

contains no

prohibition

of uncovered liquid.

And we are not concerned lest a snake marked it with its bite.

According to whom,

according to whose view is this permission stated?

According to this tanna,

according to this tanna cited in a beraita:

as it was taught: Rabbi Eliezer says: A person may eat grapes and figs at night and need not be concerned

lest there be a snake’s bite in them, and he does not notice it in the darkness.

And the reason is

because it is stated

[Psalms 116:6]

“The Lord protects the simple”!

Rav Safra said in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua of the South

from the South:

There are three types of venom

that are found

which

in snakes:

a.

That of a young one

a young snake; its venom is strong and heavy, and

sinks

into the beverage, to the bottom of the vessel.

b.

That of a

snake

of intermediate age,

which is neither young nor old, and this venom

permeates

it neither sinks nor floats, but remains in the middle of the vessel.

c.

And that of an

old

snake,

whose venom

floats

upward.

The Gemara asks:

Does this mean

that every

the older

the snake becomes

the weaker is its strength,

its strength is weak and feeble, and this is difficult —

But it was taught: There are three, for as long as they grow older —

their might increases.

And these are they: a fish, a snake, and a swine.

And if so, we see that its strength increases?!

The Gemara answers:

It is strength that it increases,

indeed, when it grows old it increases in strength. However,

its venom,

its venom,

becomes thinner.

It becomes weak and diluted, and because of this it floats upward.

We learned in the beraita above: The venom

of a young one,

a young snake,

sinks.

And the Gemara discusses:

For what halakhic purpose,

for the purpose of which halakha, was this matter stated?

As it was taught: A barrel whose opening was uncovered,

its opening,

even though nine drank from it

people

and did not die, a tenth should not drink from it.

Because the venom sinks downward. And if the tenth drinks from the water in which the venom is, he will die!

And with regard to this halakha it was stated that the venom of a young snake sinks. This teaches us that it is forbidden to drink from the bottom of a barrel that was uncovered.

And indeed,

it happened that they drank from it

from the barrel,

nine

people

and did not die, and a tenth drank —

and died!

And concerning this incident

Rabbi Yirmeya said:

the thing that caused his death,

this is

the venom that

sinks

to the bottom of the barrel. And therefore the last one who drank from the bottom of the barrel died.

And likewise,

the law is with

a watermelon that was uncovered: even though nine people ate from it and did not die, a tenth should not eat from it.

Because when a watermelon is opened, the entire place where it was opened remains uncovered. And since its inside is soft, the venom sinks into it.

And likewise,

it happened

with regard to this matter,

and nine ate from it and did not die. And a tenth ate —

and died!

Rabbi said:

the thing that caused his death,

this is

the venom that

sinks

into the flesh of the fruit.

The Sages taught: Water that was uncovered—one may not pour it out in the public domain.

For there is concern lest a person pass there barefoot and the venom remain between the joints of his toes; and if some of the venom enters and pierces his flesh, there is no remedy for this!

And one may not use it to settle the dust of the house.

He may not pour it on the floor of the house in order to settle the earth and dust on the floor, so that it will not rise into the air, because there is concern lest one of the members of the household walk on the earth settled with the water, and the venom enter him!

And one may not knead clay with it,

for the act of kneading the clay is performed with his hands, and the venom may enter them.

And one may not water from them, neither

the

his animal

which he may kill through the venom that may be found in the water,

nor

the

animal of his fellow.

For if he kills it, he is found to have caused his fellow a loss.

And one may not wash his face, hands, or feet with them,

lest the venom penetrate them.

Others say:

if he washes

a place

on his body

that has a crack,

a split in his flesh,

it is forbidden

to wash with this water, since the venom enters and penetrates through the crack into the flesh.

But if

there is no crack

in the place where he washes,

it is permitted.

Since presumably the venom will fall away and will not penetrate the flesh.

The Gemara asks: The view of

Others —

that is,

it is the same as the words of

the first tanna,

for the first tanna prohibited washing one’s face, hands, and feet with them.

But the face, hands, and feet are places that have cracks [such as the cracks in the palm of the hand; likewise, the ears and lips are open places], and it apparently follows from the words of the first tanna that as for the other places of the body, it is permitted to wash them with this water. If so, what is the difference between the words of the first tanna and the words of Others?

The Gemara answers:

There is a difference between them

the difference between them is in the law of

the back of the hand, the back of the foot, and the cheeks

[the cheeks].

For in all these places there are no cracks. According to the first tanna, they too are forbidden to wash with this water, since in the end they are included within hands, feet, and face; and according to Others, it is permitted, since there are no cracks in them.

The Master said

above:

One may not water from them

from this uncovered water,

neither

the

his animal, nor

the

animal of his fellow.

The Gemara asks:

But it was taught: But he may water

with this water

his own animal?!

The Gemara answers:

When that

beraita

was taught,

it refers

to a cat,

to a cat. And a cat is not harmed by drinking snake venom. And for this reason, he may water his own cat with this water.

The Gemara asks:

If so,

if that is so,

his fellow’s also,

he should likewise water his fellow’s cat with this water. And why was it stated that he waters only his own animal?

And the Gemara answers: It is forbidden to water

his fellow’s

cat, because

it becomes emaciated.

Drinking the venom causes its flesh to become emaciated.

And it is difficult: If so,

his own also becomes emaciated.

Does drinking the venom also cause his cat to become emaciated?

And the Gemara answers: After it drinks the venom and becomes emaciated,

it recovers,

it returns and becomes healthy. And if so, there is no prohibition against watering a cat with uncovered water.

But if so,

his fellow’s also,

he should likewise water his fellow’s cat, since it too

recovers,

returns and becomes healthy?

And the Gemara resolves:

Sometimes he needs to sell it,

sometimes his fellow wishes to sell his cat, and the cat has not yet recovered,

and he causes him a loss through it.

He must sell it at a lower price because of its emaciation.

Rav Asi said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira: There are three types of wine

that are forbidden

which:

a.

Yayin nesekh

that was actually poured as an offering for idolatry,

is forbidden for benefit, and imparts

this wine

ritual impurity

of a severe kind,

in a tent and through carrying, like a corpse; and this impurity is

at

the measure of

an olive-bulk.