Previous Daf

AVODAH ZARAH 74

Ask A Question

1)   click for question
(a) Our Mishnah lists Yayin Nesech, Avodas-Kochavim and Oros Levuvin - among the things that are Asur and that render forbidden with a 'Kol she'Hu'.
(b) 'Oros Levuvin' are - skins of animals that were worshipped, and in which a round hole is bored next to the heart, so as to cut out the animal's heart, whilst it is still alive.
(c) The Tana also lists Shor ha'Niskal, Eglah Arufah, Tziporei Metzora and Se'ar Nazir'. We know that the hair of a Nazir is Asur be'Hana'ah - from the Pasuk in Naso, which requires it to be placed under the pot containing the Nazir's boiling Shelamim.
(d) And his list ends with Peter Chamor, Basar be'Chalav and Chulin she'Nishchatu ba'Azarah - of which the Peter Chamor is redeemable by a lamb.

2)   click for question
(a) When the Tana lists Basar be'Chalav, he is referring to a case where - a piece of meat that has been cooked in milk then falls into a pot containing other food.
(b) If a drop of milk falls into a pot of meat, or vice-versa - it becomes Bateil be'Nosen Ta'am (one in sixty).
(c) If the items in our Mishnah are not Batel because they are ...
1. ... 'Davar she'be'Minyan', we ask, why did the Tana not include - a piece of Neveilah in the list.
2. ... Isurei Hana'ah, then he ought to have included - Chametz on Pesach.
(d) Rebbi Chiya bar Aba (or Rebbi Yitzchak Nafcha) therefore explains that the Tana omits these items - because his list is confined to things that fall under both categories 'Isurei Hana'ah and 'Davar she'be'Minyan'.

3)   click for question
(a) The hair of a Nazir is a 'Davar she'be'Minyan' - because they tended to tie hair into bundles and sell so many bundles per Sela in sacks.
(b) If a small piece of Chametz gets mixed up with pieces of Matzah, or a piece of Neveilah with pieces of Kasher meat - one piece is thrown into the river, and the rest may be fed to one's dogs.
(c) The Tana omits from the list ...
1. ... nuts from Perech and pomegranates from Badan of Orlah and K'lai ha'Kerem - because he has already listed them in the Mishnah in Orlah.
2. ... privately-baked loaves of bread that got mixed up with Matzah (seeing as strictly speaking, Matzah may be anything up to a Tefach thick) - because the Tana who considers privately-baked loaves a 'Davar she'be'Minyan' is Rebbi Akiva, and he inserts them there, too.
(d) When the Tana concludes 'Harei Eilu Asurin ve'Isuran be'Chol she'Hu', he comes to preclude - either Isurei Hana'ah that are not Davar she'be'Minyan or Davar she'be'Minyan that are not Isurei Hana'ah (which are in fact subject to Bitul).

4)   click for question
(a) The Tana Kama of our Mishnah forbids all the wine in a wine-pit into which Yayin Nesech fell. Raban Shimon ben Gamliel - permits selling the wine to a Nochri, provided one deducts the value of the Yayin Nesech from the price.
(b) Shmuel rules like Raban Shimon ben Gamliel in all cases. Rav agrees - in a case where it is barrels that got mixed up, but not wine (which actually mixes and) where he rules like the Chachamim.
(c) Most Amora'im (Rabah bar bar Chanah Amar Rebbi Yochanan ... Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar Avuhah) agree - with Shmuel.
(d) The last word however, goes to Rav Nachman, who rules like Rav regarding Yayin Nesech - and like Shmuel, regarding S'tam Yeinam.

5)   click for question
(a) Our Mishnah rules that the stone tub (of a wine-press) that has been tarred by a Nochri - requires Niguv (cleaning out with ashes and water).
(b) This is necessary - because after the tarring, one tends to add a little wine, in order to put a stop to the smoke that rises from the tar.
(c) If it is a wooden tub, Rebbi requires the same method of Hechsher as a stone one. whereas the Chachamim require 'Kiluf' - peeling off a layer from the tar ...
(d) ... because wood absorbs more than stone.
(e) With regard to a tub that is made of earthenware - even Kiluf will not help (though this ruling is not unanimous, as we shall see in the Sugya).

6)   click for question
(a) Rava establishes our Mishnah specifically by a tub that has been tarred by a Nochri, but if he treads grapes in a tub that has not been tarred - even Niguv is unnecessary, only Hadachah (washing).
(b) Rava needs to tell us this, despite the fact that the Mishnah states 'she'Zafsah Akum' - because we would otherwise have ignored the obvious implication, assuming that the Tana mentions 'she'Zafsah' because it is common for a Nochri to tar a wine-press and to add wine.
(c) In the second Lashon - Rava once again establishes our Mishnah specifically by a tub that has been tarred by a Nochri, but adds that if he then treads grapes in it, Niguv will not suffice.
(d) Here again, we ask why this is not obvious from the Mishnah itself - and we give the same answer as we gave before (that if not for Rava, we would have thought the Din is the same in both cases, and that the Tana mentions 'she'Zafsah' only because it is common, as we explained).
(e) The latter case is more stringent in this regard - due to the cracks in the tar that sometimes occur, that fill with wine if one subsequently presses grapes in it.

7)   click for question
(a) And we support the second Lashon with a case that took place with Rav. Rebbi Chiya sent Rav with a certain man, who had requested that Rebbi Chiya send someone to check the Kashrus of his wine-press.
(b) Rav's first impression was - that the tar was particularly smooth, and that the tub only required Niguv.
(c) He changed his mind however - when he spotted cracks in the tar, in which wine had collected, and ruled that it needed Kiluf.
(d) Rebbi Chiya actually anticipated this - by warning Rav to take care not to arouse the ire of his colleagues in the Beis Hamedrash (by doing what he almost did).
(e) When Rav spoke of 'Chavivi', he was referring to - Rebbi Chiya, his uncle.

8)   click for question
(a) The Beraisa discusses an earthenware tub and the jar and the funnel (from the wine-press) that have been tarred by a Nochri. Rebbi permits them with Niguv alone. The Chachamim require Kiluf.
(b) We know that the Tana so far is speaking a. about earthenware vessels, and b. about an untarred tub - because he is about to move on to wood and stone vessels on the one hand, and tarred vessels, on the other.
(c) Rebbi concedes to the Chachamim that (even untarred) jars require Kiluf (even though a wine-press does not) - because they contain the wine for longer periods of time.

9)   click for question
(a) We reconcile our Mishnah, which permits Niguv in the case of a stone tub that a Nochri tarred, and according to Rebbi, even a wooden one, with the Beraisa, which requires a tarred tub to be peeled, even if it is made of stone - by establishing the case when the Nochri trod the grapes (whilst our Mishnah speaks when he did not).
(b) The problem with the Beraisa, where Rebbi permits an earthenware tub, jar and funnel with mere Niguv is - that the Seifa of our Mishnah forbids an earthenware tub (even with Kiluf, let alone Niguv).
(c) To resolve the discrepancy, Rava establishes our Mishnah - like the Chachamim.
(d) Rebbi now holds that ...
1. ... a tarred tub made of stone or of wood - requires - Niguv.
2. ... a tarred tub made of earthenware - requires - Kiluf.
3. ... an untarred tub made of earthenware requires - Niguv.

10)   click for question
(a) 'Na'avah' is a wine-press, and when we say 'Rava Na'avah Artecho', we mean - that Rava would Kasher thr tub of his wine-press with boiling water ('Hag'alah').
(b) Rava used to send empty barrels (which had absorbed wine)to Horpanya, with a Nochri - by placing them upside-down inside a sack, which he then sealed ...
(c) ... because he maintained - that anything that is handed to a Nochri, even for a short time period, requires a 'seal within a seal' (a decree in case one gives it to him for a long period).

11)   click for question
(a) According to Rav, they performed Niguv using water, whereas according to Rabah bar bar Chanah - they used ashes.
(b) We object to both opinions however, on the grounds that, on the one hand, water is not called 'Niguv', and on the other, after cleaning the tub with ashes, one would inevitably rinse it out with water (as we shall soon see).
(c) Consequently, Rav must mean - first with water, and then with ashes; and Rabah bar bar Chanah - first with ashes and then with water.
(d) And we conclude that in fact, they do not argue, because they are referring to different cases, 'Ha bi'Retivta, ve'ha be'Yabeshta' - meaning that one of them is speaking where the tub is still wet (in which case one first needs to dry them with ashes); whilst the other one is speaking where it is already dry (and one first needs to wet it before drying it out with ashes).
(e) The former is - Rabah bar bar Chanah; the latter - Rav.

Next Daf