Previous daf

1)

(a) In a case where a Nochri locked the door of a room that contained wine-barrels belonging to a Yisrael - they discovered a Nochri wandering among the wine-barrels.

(b) Based on the fact that there was a crack in the door - Rava permitted the barrels that could be seen through the crack (which the Nochri would have been afraid to touch for fear that the Yisrael would see him through the crack), but forbade the barrels at the side.

(c) In a case where a barrel of wine belonging to the Yisrael on the upper floor was stored in the room of a Nochri who lived on the lower floor - they all left the house when they heard the sound of a people quarreling.

(d) Rava permitted the wine, after the Nochri re-entered his apartment and locked the door - because, he argued, the Nochri would be afraid to touch the wine, for fear that the Yisrael entered his apartment, too, and would see him touching.

(a) In a case where they found a Nochri wandering around the barrels of wine belonging to a Yisrael which were stored ...

1. ... in a Nochri's inn - Rava permitted the wine only if he was a nonentity, who was afraid of the judges of the town, but if he was an important person, then it would be forbidden (as we explained at the end of 'Rebbi Yishmael').
2. ... in the owner's house - Rava permitted the wine only if the Nochri *did not have any excuse* for being in the inn (because he would then be afraid to touch it), but not if he *did*, in which case he would rely on his excuse to touch the wine.

(b) This is worse than a similar case (which we will learn later) where the Yisrael left the Nochri in his wine store - and which is permitted because there the owner was aware of his presence, and the Nochri would therefore be afraid to be caught touching the wine.

(c) The Beraisa rules in a case where the inn was shut (leaving the Nochri inside) or where the owner of a barrel of wine asked the Nochri to look after his wine from outside - that the wine is forbidden (in the latter case, because he thinks that the owner is going away).

(d) We reconcile Rava's latest ruling with the Beraisa - by establishing the latter when the Nochri had an excuse to be inside the inn.

(a) The Yisrael who was sitting and drinking wine together with a Nochri left the room - because he heard a Minyan begin Davenning 'Minchah' next door.

(b) Rava permitted the wine - because the Nochri would be afraid to touch it, in case the Yisrael would suddenly remember his wine and return.

(c) In all the current cases, when Rava ...

1. ... permits the wine, he means - that one may even drink it (seeing as the Nochri did not touch it).
2. ... forbids it, he means - that it is even Asur be'Hana'ah.

(a) When a Yisrael was drinking wine together with a Nochri in a boat one Friday afternoon, he got up and left - when he heard the Shofar being blown (to herald the approach of Shabbos).

(b) Rava permitted the wine - because, he explained, the Nochri would be afraid to touch the wine, in case the Yirael returned for his wine.

(c) Isur Giyora testified - that, when he was a Nochri, he and his friends believed that the Jews don't keep Shabbos (from the fact that there were never any lost articles in the streets on Shabbos (an indication that the Jews had picked them all up and carried them home).

(d) And this explains why - Rava did not forbid the wine because the Nochri knew that the Yisrael could not return to pick up his wine, since on Shabbos, it was forbidden to carry it.

(e) The Nochrim's mistake lay in the ruling of Rebbi Yitzchak (of which they were unaware) - permitting someone who finds a purse containing money on Shabbos, to carry it home, provided he carries it less than four Amos at a time (which the Torah does not consider carrying).

(a) That Nochri hid behind the barrels in the wine-press - when he heard a lion roaring in the vicinity.

(b) Rava nevertheless permitted the barrels in the wine-press - because the Nochri would figure that if he hid behind one barrel, some Jews may have hidden behind barrels that were behind his, and would spot him if he tried touching the wine.

(c) When thieves arrived in Pumbedisa and opened many barrels of wine, Rava permited the wine - on the basis of the fact that most thieves in Pumbedisa were Yisre'elim.

(d) Shmuel (who lived long before Rava) had issued the same ruling when this happened in Neherda'a. His reason however though- was not the same as Rava's, since Pumbedisa was unique in that few Nochrim lived there.

(a) We try to equate Shmuel's ruling with Rebbi Eliezer in the Mishnah in Taharos, where a man is not sure whether he touched Tum'ah in a certain field in a Bik'ah (a series of fields) - In fact, he is uncertain whether he entered the field which contained the Tum'ah or not.

(b) Rebbi Eliezer rules - that he is Tahor, but only because it is a case of Safek Bi'ah (whether he even entered the field). In a case of Vaday Bi'ah, but Safek Tum'ah, he would have declared him Tamei.

(c) His ruling is confined to winter - when, due to the fact that the fields have already been seeded, and people avoid walking in them, a Bik'ah has the Din of a Reshus ha'Yachid, whose Safek is Asur. In the summer - he would have permitted even Vaday Bi'ah, ve'Safek Tum'ah.

(d) We refute the suggestion that Shmuel's ruling follows the opinion of Rebbi Eliezer - because in his case, there is the additional Safek that maybe the Nochri opened the barrels for their monetary gain (and not with the intention of being Menasech). Consequently, this is a case of 'S'fek S'feika', whih even the Rabbanan will agree is permitted.

7)

(a) In the case where a young Nochri girl was found among the barrels with foam in her hand. Rava permitted the wine - because he assumed that she got it from the back of the barrel (and not from the inside [bearing in mind that such a young girl probably didn't know much about Nisuch anyway]).

(b) Nor would it make any difference - even if there was not a trace of foam on the barrel.

(c) He would not have ruled the same way had she been a few years older, and was more conversant with the concept of Nisuch.

(a) When a royal army entered Neherda'a and opened many barrels of wine, Rav Dimi cited Rebbi Elazar as having ruled in a similar case in Eretz Yisrael - that the wine was permitted.

(b) He was not sure however, whether Rebbi Elazar's ruling was based on the opinion of Rebbi Eliezer (see Hagahos ha'Bach) who permits Safek Bi'ah (as we learned on the previous Amud) or - because the majority of soldiers who came with the army (in Rebbi Elazar's town) happened to be Jewish.

(c) The problem with Rav Dimi's referring to the case as 'Safek Bi'ah' is - that seeing as they opened the barrels, it is surely a question of Safek Maga, and not Safek Bi'ah.

(d) We answer - that the excessive number of barrels (far more than they needed for their personal use) proves that they opened them to sell their contents (and not to drink and to be Menasech), causing Rebbi Elazar to treat the case with the same leniency as Safek Bi'ah according to Rebbi Elazar.

(a) Rebbi Yitzchak Amar Rebbi Elazar cited a ruling with regard to a woman wine-seller who handed the key to a Nochris - permitting the wine (because she only gave her the key to look after (and not to help herself to the wine). Consequently, she will be afraid to take the liberty of using the key to gain entry, for fear of being caught in the act.

(b) Abaye supported this ruling with a Beraisa. The Tana rules there that if someone hands the keys of his Taharos to an Am-ha'Aretz - they remain Tahor.

(c) Abaye learned the Din of Yayin Nesech from this Beraisa - from a 'Kal va'Chomer'.

(a) According to Rav, if a Chaver (who is particular about Tum'ah) puts up a low wall between himself and an Am-ha'Aretz, his Taharos are Tamei - whereas in the event that his neighbor was a Nochri - his wine would not be Yayin Nesech.

(b) Rebbi Yochanan maintains - that the Chaver's Taharos remain Tahor, too.

(c) We learn from Rav - that Yayin Nesech is more lenient than Taharos, bearing out Abaye's 'Kal va'Chomer'.

(a) The Beraisa rules in a case where a Chaver lives in the inside Chatzer and an Am-ha'Aretz in the outside one - that the Chaver may spread out his fruit and place his vessels in his Chatzer (and not worry about them becoming Tamei).

(b) Despite the fact that the Tana is speaking when the Nochri is able to reach inside the Chaver's Chatzer, Rav reconciles his opinion with the Beraisa - because whereas there the Nochri is afraid of being caught in the act, he is not afraid of that in his case, where they divided a small Chatzer, which basically remains like one Chatzer.

(c) In another Beraisa, Raban Shimon ben Gamliel permits the Chaver whose roof is higher than his Am-ha'Aretz neighbor's, to spread out his fruit and to place his vessels on his roof without worrying about Tum'ah - provided the Nochri cannot reach across to his roof.

(a) To reconcile this Beraisa with his opinion, Rebbi Yochanan explains this Beraisa, according to those whose text reads 'Meimar Amar ...

1. ... 'Imtzuri ka'Memtzera', to mean - that there the Nochri has an excuse, in that he can claim to have been stretching out his hand because he was measuring the wall of his Chatzer where he intends to put up a building.
2. ... 'Imtzudi ka'Memtzadna' to mean - that he was just stretching.

(b) And Rav will reconcile his opinion with a similar S'tam Beraisa which permits it even if the Am ha'Aretz is able to reach across to the Chaver's roof - by citing the previous Beraisa of Raban Shimon ben Gamliel, with whose opinion he conforms.

(a) Our Mishnah discusses a Boleshes that comes into town. 'Boleshes' is - an army, so called from the word 'Bolesh', which means to search (because enemy soldiers tend to search and dig).

(b) In a case where the Boleshes enters in time of peace - the Tana forbids open barrels of wine, but permits sealed ones.

(c) If however, the same Boleshes enters in time of war, says the Tana - even the open barrels will be permitted, because the soldiers have no time to be Menasech.

(a) In connection with a besieging army that breached the walls and entered the city - the Beraisa forbids all the Kohanos in the city to their husbands.

(b) It may not be their fault that they fell prey to unruly soldiers - but the Torah forbids the wife of a Kohen to her husband even if she is raped.

(c) We reconcile this with the Seifa of our Mishnah which permits the wine in time of war, because of the principle 'Ein P'nai Le'nasech' - by making a distinction between Nisuch and Bi'ah ('Le'nasech Ein P'nai, Li've'ol Ein P'nai').