Avodah Zarah 56a — the Talmud in English

And the beraita continues:

b.

And one may not harvest together with an Israelite who makes his produce in a state of impurity,

because he causes impurity to produce that is tevel for teruma, as explained.

And all the more so, one may not tread

together with him, since their treading in an impure winepress renders them impure; it follows that he is not merely “causing,” but actually “assisting” the transgressor in the commission of the transgression.

c.

But one may harvest together with a gentile in the winepress,

since it is not yet wine to be called yayin nesekh, and likewise it is not forbidden on account of “causing impurity,” because

it is permitted to cause impurity to

produce

of non-sacred produce in the Land of Israel,

since the gentile is exempt from separating teruma from his produce, and his produce is not tevel for teruma.

We learned in our Mishna:

And it does not become yayin nesekh until it descends into the pit.

The Gemara cites a Mishna in tractate Maaserot, and it is stated there that even when the wine is found in the pit, it is still not called wine until it “forms a crust.” This means that the grape seeds—and these are the parts of the grapes that were not strained properly in the strainer [called a “gargatoni”] before their entry into the pit—float above the wine .

That is, as long as the wine is continuing to flow into the pit, the grape seeds and the wine in the pit become mixed, because of the flow of the wine. And when it rests from its flow, the grape seeds rise to the surface of the pit. [

It is permitted to eat a casual eating of produce that is tevel as long as its processing has not been completed. And each individual fruit has its own completion of processing, according to its nature. The Mishna in tractate Maaserot discusses what is the completion of the processing of wine.]

And we raise an objection:

But it was taught in a beraita [

another version:

But we learned in the Mishna]

did we not learn: From when is the completion of processing [established] with regard to the laws of tithes?

Wine, once it forms a crust,

after its entry into the pit.

And we answer:

Rava said: It is not difficult,

it is not a contradiction between Mishnayot, but a dispute among tannaim:

this,

the Mishna in tractate Maaserot, is the Mishna of

Rabbi Akiva, and

and

this,

our Mishna, is the Mishna of

the Rabbis—

.

As we learned [

another version:

As it was taught in a beraita]

we learned in a beraita:

Wine

has its completion of processing for the tithe

once it descends into the pit; these are the words of the Sages, whereas

; these are the words of the Rabbis. But

Rabbi Akiva says: Once it forms a crust.

Thus, Rabbi Akiva and the Sages indeed disagree about this.

They raised a dilemma,

the members of the academy were uncertain: This forming of a crust that Rabbi Akiva stated—

is it the forming of a crust of the pit

as explained,

or the forming of a crust of the barrel,

after the wine is placed into barrels, when some grape seeds still remain in it and float on the surface of the barrel—

And the Gemara is uncertain: it is possible that Rabbi Akiva holds that only at this forming of a crust, which is very late in the process of producing wine, is the name wine applied to it.

And we resolve it:

Come and hear: As it was taught in a beraita [

another version:

As we learned in the Mishna]

we learned in the Mishna cited above, and it is the Mishna of Rabbi Akiva:

Wine,

has its completion of processing

once it forms a crust.

And the Mishna continues:

Even though it has formed a crust

inside the pit, and it is forbidden to drink casually from the wine in the pit until he has rectified its tithes—in any event, it is permitted to drink casually from wine remaining in the winepress. Therefore:

He draws,

he draws wine

from the upper winepress and from the channel,

from which the wine descends into the pit,

and drinks,

a casual drinking, because that wine has still not completed its processing .

And from the fact that the Mishna speaks of wine that formed a crust in the pit—

learn from this: We are speaking of the forming of a crust of the pit,

and this is the forming of a crust about which Rabbi Akiva spoke. For if you say it is the forming of a crust of the barrels, what connection do they have with the winepress and the channel—

Learn from this,

and the dilemma is resolved.

And we raise an objection:

But he taught,

did

Rav Zevid, in the house of

the beraitot of

Rabbi Oshaya, teach:

Wine—once it descends into the pit and forms a crust,

that is its completion of processing for tithes. These are the words of the Sages.

Rabbi Akiva says: From the time that he

raises

it,

he raises the wine from the pit so that it will be placed

in barrels.

And this beraita contradicts what was explained above, both according to the words of the Sages and according to the words of Rabbi Akiva, because in the earlier beraita we learned that the Sages hold: once it descends into the pit, whereas in the beraita of Rabbi Oshaya we learned that they hold that it is not called wine until it forms a crust in the pit.

And likewise, in the earlier beraita we learned that Rabbi Akiva holds: until it forms a crust in the pit, whereas in the beraita of Rabbi Oshaya we learned that it is not called wine until it is raised from the pit to be placed in barrels?

And we answer: This beraita of Rabbi Oshaya is more authoritative, and we shall explain the earlier beraita in accordance with the version of Rabbi Oshaya—

Explain also

explain also

that earlier one,

that earlier beraita—

thus,

in this version:

Wine—

once it descends into the pit and forms a crust.

These are the words of the Sages. Whereas

Rabbi Akiva says: Once it has been drawn into barrels.

And the Gemara discusses:

But if so,

if this is so,

our Mishna,

our Mishna, and it is the first Mishna,

which teaches,

which we learned in it:

It does not become yayin nesekh until it descends into the pit,

even before it has formed a crust in the pit —

Shall we say that it is a dispute among three tannaim?

Are there three opinions: the first, our Mishna, which holds concerning yayin nesekh [and it is reasonable that likewise with regard to tithes] that from the time of its descent into the pit it is called wine, before it forms a crust . The second, the Sages, who hold: once it forms a crust in the pit. And the third, Rabbi Akiva, who holds: once it is drawn into barrels.

And we conclude:

No,

there is no need to say this. The tanna of our Mishna stated his law only with regard to yayin nesekh, because

the law of yayin nesekh is different,

its law is different, because

the Rabbis were stringent in its case,

the Rabbis

were stringent in its law and said that even before it has formed a crust in the pit, it is called wine and is forbidden through the gentile’s contact.

And he concedes with regard to the tithe that it does not become wine until it forms a crust, according to the opinion of the Sages, or until it is drawn into barrels, according to the opinion of Rabbi Akiva.

And there are not three opinions in this law.