Avodah Zarah 72b — the Talmud in English

And he returned and measured

wine

into the flask of the Israelite, ![](pamud.bmp "

precise column location")

if there is in it a remnant of prohibited wine".

The Gemara is precise:

this remnant of wine [the same remnant of wine that remained in the funnel]

by what does it become prohibited [by what was it prohibited],

—

for the funnel did not touch the yayin nesekh

? Is it not through nitsuk [was it not prohibited through the stream of wine that connected it to the yayin nesekh] ?!

If so,

learn from it

that

a nitsuk

constitutes

a connection

in yayin nesekh!

The Gemara says:

Rabbi Hiyya taught [Rabbi Hiyya added in his Mishna]

, "that its flask caused it to overflow".

That is to say, the Jew filled the vessel for the gentile to its brim, and the wine in the vessel touched the funnel. It follows that that remnant of wine became prohibited through direct contact between it and the yayin nesekh.

The Gemara raises an objection:

But if its flask did not cause it to overflow, what [is the law]? Is it not [prohibited]?!

If so, in any event

resolve

from the words of Rabbi Hiyya

that a nitsuk is not a connection?

And we reject this:

No! If its flask caused it to overflow, you can resolve for yourself that it is prohibited.

But

the question of a nitsuk remains.

Another proof:

Come and hear,

we learned in the Mishna:

"One who pours from one vessel into another, that from which he pours is permitted".

The Gemara understood that this concerns an Israelite pouring wine into a vessel belonging to a gentile. And the Gemara is precise: only the wine in the upper vessel is permitted,

but that which is between them,

the wine in the nitsuk between the two vessels,

is prohibited.

Learn from it: a nitsuk is a connection!

The Gemara raises an objection,

if a nitsuk is a connection, even that inside the vessel [the wine in the upper vessel]

should also become prohibited?

The Gemara answers:

This is not difficult, for he severs it drop by drop.

That is to say, the flow from the upper vessel was interrupted before the nitsuk touched the lower vessel. But

nevertheless,

if there was

a nitsuk,

it is

a connection.

The Gemara rejects the proof:

And according to your reasoning,

if it is as you said, that you were precise, "but that which is between them is prohibited",

say the latter clause, [how will you interpret the latter clause], "that into which he pours is prohibited"; it implies that only

“the contents poured into it are forbidden; but the wine in between is permitted”?

that into which he pours is prohibited, but that which is between them is permitted?

Rather, from this one cannot infer anything.

Another proof:

Come and hear,

we learned in a beraita:

"One who pours

wine

from a barrel into a pit, the flow descending from the lip of the barrel downward is prohibited".

And apparently, the reason for the prohibition is because of "nitsuk".

The Gemara rejects:

Rav Sheshet explained it [Rav Sheshet explains the beraita],

it is speaking

of a gentile who is pouring,

and the nitsuk is prohibited because

it comes through his force.

But one cannot prove from here that, when an Israelite pours wine from a barrel into a pit, the nitsuk is prohibited.

The Gemara raises an objection:

If

it is speaking of

a gentile who is pouring, even what is inside the barrel [what is inside the barrel]

should also become prohibited?

The Gemara answers:

The force of a gentile is prohibited by rabbinic decree.

And therefore,

that which went outside [the wine that went outside through his force]

the Sages decreed concerning it; that which is inside, the Sages did not decree concerning it.

Rav Hisda said to those wine merchants [wine sellers]

, when you measure wine [when you pour wine]

to

a vessel

of gentiles, sever it drop by drop. Alternatively, shake it off forcefully.

So that there will not be a nitsuk connecting the vessels.

And likewise

Rava said to those pourers [Jewish workers who pour wine from one vessel into another]

, when you pour wine, do not let a gentile come near to assist you [do not let the gentile come near and assist you]

, lest you become tired and throw the barrel onto him [lest you become tired and drop the barrel on him]

, and it will come through his force, and it is prohibited.

An incident involving

a certain man who drew up wine with a gishata and a bat gishata [he transferred wine from one vessel to another by means of a "gishata", that is, two reeds joined to one another at their upper end at an angle; he sucks from one side until the wine rises, and it passes from one barrel to another by itself]

. A gentile came and placed his hand on the gishata [he touched the end of the reed through which the wine was flowing]

. Rava prohibited all the wine [Rava prohibited all the wine].

Rav Pappa said to Rava—and some say Rav Adda bar Mattena said to Rava—and some say Ravina said to Rava, "For what reason" [why did Rava prohibit the wine]

? Because of a nitsuk. You have learned from it that a nitsuk is a connection.

The Gemara rejects:

There it is different, for all the wine is drawn through the gishata and the bat gishata.

Since the wine falls by itself through the "gishata", everything is like one elongated barrel. But one cannot prove from here concerning an ordinary nitsuk.

Mar Zutra, son of Rav Nahman, said: kanishkanin [a vessel that has several reeds emerging from its sides, through which several people can drink from it simultaneously]

is permitted.

It is permitted for an Israelite and a gentile to drink together from the same vessel. Since, as long as this one is sucking, the wine in his mouth does not return downward]

And this applies when the Israelite finishes first [only if the Jew finishes drinking before the gentile is it permitted]

, but if the gentile finishes first, no.

Since when he finished drinking, wine returned from his mouth into the vessel.

Rabba bar Rav Huna happened to come to the house of the Exilarch, and permitted them to drink from kanishkanin.