Avodah Zarah 067

1:
This mishnah is very simple, and just supplying the subjects for the verbs will make all clear.

2:
A Jew and a non-Jew are eating at the same table. Perhaps it would be helpful to imagine a Jewish employer with a non-Jewish employee and both are taking a mid-day break to eat their lunch. On the dining table is a bottle of kosher wine and there is another one on the buffet-table. (What I have rendered "buffet-table" refers to a smaller table from which the food and drink were served to the dining table.) In the middle of the meal or after it the Jew leaves the room leaving the non-Jew alone with the bottles of wine.

3:
Our mishnah rules in a most understandable manner. When the Jew returns the wine that is open on the dining table must now be considered to be yeyn nesekh because there is no reason to suppose that the non-Jew would not have drunk from that bottle. Extra bottles that are still on the buffet-table may be considered as still kosher, since, if there is an open bottle on the dining table it is not likely that the non-Jew would have drunk from the bottle which is on the buffet table.

4:
However, if, before leaving, the Jew says to the non-Jew something like, "While I'm away please help yourself to some wine" then, upon his return, he must assume that the wine which is on the buffet-table is also now yeyn nesekh, since the non-Jew would have felt free to help himself to any of the wine in the room.

5:
The ruling in the final clause of our mishnah is clear, and follows naturally from what was said in the two previous mishnahs. Casks (as opposed to bottles) that are left open and unguarded must be considered to be yeyn nesekh when they are accessible to a non-Jew; casks that are still sealed may be considered to still be kosher unless the Jew was absent for as long as it takes to open the cask, drink from it, reseal it, and to tidy up the clay around the seal (as explained in AZ 065 and AZ 066.

In AZ 066 I responded to a question from Ze'ev Orzech. The question was about additives that improve the taste of a dish (or a beverage) and additives that spoil it.

Mike Lewyn now writes:

In response to the exchange: now I am confused – what happens when the additive neither improves nor spoils the flavor?

I respond:

Since the additive does not spoil the flavour the mixture must be considered as forbidden. Only when a forbidden additive spoils the taste of the mixture is it permitted: no one is likely to want to eat or drink it anyway.

Israel Man writes:

Imagine that a Gentile organization would come out with a printed booklet containing the AZ mishnaiot with only one change i.e. swapping the word Goy or Nochri with the word Jew and vice versa. We would have cried GEVALT! Antisemites! Is it not the time to ignore, change or denounce these Halachot? I would like to start a debate among the subscribers.

I respond:

I have no objection to the debate if people want to offer their thoughts. I will be the first to do so.

I think that Israel has misunderstood the whole drift of the treatment of yeyn nesekh. We should note that at no stage in the discussion does the mishnah say that it is forbidden for a non-Jew to touch kosher wine. The whole onus is upon the Jew: if he doesn't want his wine to become yeyn nesekh he must take steps to prevent this happening. The discussion in the mishnah makes it very clear that Jews worked for non-Jews and non-Jews worked for Jews. Indeed, the mishnah that we studied today makes it clear that Jews and non-Jews worked together.

The non-Jew need know nothing about yeyn nesekh. Since yeyn nesekh means nothing to him why should we, as Jews, assume that he would not treat the wine as any other wine?

The sages have placed all the onus on the Jew to take steps to preserve the kashrut of his wine. They suggest to him various situations that could arise in the course of everyday life and give him rules to guide him how to prevent a loss. We should remember that in the end, if wine becomes yeyn nesekh the Jew has no redress: he cannot sue the non-Jew for "doing what comes naturally"; his own negligence has caused his loss.

I see nothing in all the mishnahs that have dealt with yeyn nesekh that need be understood as disparaging in any way towards non-Jews.

Your comments are welcome.

At this time I am not in the best of health and have to undergo a complicated series of medical tests. Forgive me if over the next couple of weeks the shiurim are a bit erratic. I shall do my best.