Avodah Zarah 56b — the Talmud in English

And the Gemara discusses:

And

according to

Rava, who does not distinguish between them,

who did not distinguish between sacrificial wine and tithes—for he raised above a contradiction between our Mishna and the Mishna in tractate Ma'asrot, and answered: It is not difficult; this one is Rabbi Akiva, and that one is the Rabbis. But apparently, why did he not answer the contradiction in this way: our Mishna was stringent with sacrificial wine; therefore, the wine becomes forbidden even before it has flowed into the pit, whereas with regard to tithes it is not called wine until it has flowed into the pit? It follows that Rava did not distinguish between sacrificial wine and tithes, and equated their laws .

And according to Rava, indeed,

he establishes it,

he reconciles the Mishnayot and the beraita,

as three tannaim,

and holds that in this law there are three opinions as to when wine is called wine, as explained .

We learned in our Mishna,

What is in the pit is forbidden, and the rest is permitted.

After the wine passes through the “channel” between the winepress and the pit, and before it descends into the pit, the wine passes through a vessel called a “gargatni,” which is a large basket that filters the wine of skins and pits. And when it becomes filled with skins and pits, they return it to the winepress—that is, they empty it into the winepress.

Rav Huna said: They taught this only

in our Mishna , that the wine in the winepress is permitted,

but only when they did not return the gargatni to the winepress—

but

if

they returned the gargatni to the winepress—

it is forbidden,

even the wine in the winepress. For the wine in the gargatni is forbidden, as will be explained, and it renders the wine and the grapes in the winepress forbidden .

Now the Gemara explains why the wine within the gargatni is forbidden, and who renders it forbidden—for it was not in the pit:

The gargatni itself,

itself,

by what does it become forbidden?

Through a flowing stream,

the stream of wine [the column of flow is called “flowing stream”] descending from the gargatni to the pit; it connects the wine in the pit, which is forbidden through the gentile’s contact, with the wine in the gargatni.

We learned a Mishna concerning the laws of ritual impurity and purity, that a flowing stream is not a connection, and it is explained in the next chapter [72a]. And there the amoraim disagree concerning the laws of sacrificial wine: There are those who hold that a flowing stream is not a connection, just as it is not a connection with regard to the laws of ritual impurity and purity. And there are amoraim who hold that with regard to the laws of sacrificial wine, a flowing stream is a connection.

And now the Gemara discusses: Is

it understood from this,

it is understood from Rav Huna’s words that he holds

“a flowing stream is a connection” ?

The Gemara rejects the inference: This does not prove that Rav Huna holds that a stream constitutes a connection. Rather, he forbids the wine when the gargutni was returned to the winepress only in a case where “its pit overflowed upon it.” That is, the pit filled, and the wine reached the bottom edge of the gargutni. Since the gargutni is a perforated vessel, the forbidden wine in the pit became mixed with the wine in the gargutni. Therefore, the wine in the gargutni became forbidden, and when it is returned and poured into the winepress, the wine in the winepress becomes forbidden.

The Gemara rejects [this]: There is no proof from here that Rav Huna holds that “a flowing stream is a connection.” Rather, he rendered it forbidden when he returned the gargatni to the winepress only in a case where “its pit caused it to overflow”; that is, the pit became full, and the wine reached the lower edges of the gargatni, and since it is a perforated vessel, the forbidden wine in the pit became mixed with the wine in the gargatni. Therefore, the wine in the gargatni became forbidden, and when he returns it and pours it into the winepress, the wine in the winepress becomes forbidden.

As Rabbi Hiyya taught,

in the passage there [72b], and established the Mishna there as referring to:

its flask caused it to overflow,

and it will be explained there—

Here too,

it is referring, for example, to:

its pit caused it to overflow,

as explained.

And the Gemara relates:

There was a certain child,

there was a child

who had learned,

who had learned the tractate

Avodah Zarah in six years,

when he was six years old!

They asked him,

they asked him:

What is

the law; is it permitted

to tread grapes together with a gentile in the winepress?

He said to them,

the child said to those who asked him:

One may tread grapes together with a gentile in the winepress.

And we raise an objection:

But he pours [the wine as an idolatrous libation],

for the gentile is touching the wine

with his hands,

with his hands, and renders it forbidden. And we learned in the later Mishna that one may not tread grapes together with a gentile in the winepress, because the gentile touches the wine, and the wine in the winepress is called wine and becomes forbidden? And we answer: It is referring, for example, to

we tied his hands,

the gentile tied his hands so that he would not touch the wine. And he trod the grapes with his feet.

And we raise an objection:

But he pours [the wine as an idolatrous libation] with his foot,

the gentile touched the wine with his feet?

And we conclude:

The pouring of the foot—

is not called pouring,

it does not have the “designation” of “pouring.” Therefore, it is permitted .

The Gemara continues to discuss the law of “pouring with the foot.” And it relates an incident:

There was a certain incident that occurred in Nehardea,

there was an incident in the city of Nehardea [the city of Shmuel],

that they trod,

with their feet,

a Jew and a gentile that wine,

the wine.

This question was brought before Shmuel,

and Shmuel delayed [his answer] for three pilgrimage festivals,

he delayed his answer for three pilgrimage festivals .

And the Gemara discusses:

What is the reason,

why did he delay answering? What was his uncertainty?