Avodah Zarah 024

of the Rabbinical Assembly in Israel
and the Masorti Movement

RABIN MISHNAH STUDY GROUP

Today's shiur is dedicated by Jay Slater and Ellen Goldmuntz
in honor of Tamara and Ethan Slater.
Baruch hagomel lachayavim tovot, shegemalanu kol tov.
Amen!
TRACTATE AVODAH ZARAH, CHAPTER TWO, MISHNAH THREE:
The following are items coming from non-Jews from which it is forbidden to derive benefit: wine, vinegar which was originally wine, Adriatic earthenware and perforated hides. Rabban Shim'on ben-Gamli'el says that when the perforation is round [the hide] is forbidden, [but] when it is elongated it is permitted. Meat [before it] enters [a place of] idolatry is permitted, but that which comes out [from there] is forbidden, because it is like sacrifices of the dead – says Rabbi Akiva. It is forbidden to do business with those who go to debauchery; but it is permitted [to do business] with those coming [from there].
EXPLANATIONS:
1:
The sages took great pains to prevent Jews from socializing with non-Jews and one of the most effective ways was to limit foodstuffs and other commodities which might be purchased from them. Items other than those mentioned in our present mishnah were included in a long list which seems to have originated during the time of the persecutions which preceded the Maccabean uprising in the 2nd century BCE and which was apparently re-ratified some time during the first decades of the first century CE [Shabbat 13b].
2:
Our mishnah refers to deriving benefit from the forbidden items. This refers not only to consumption but also to any material benefit which a Jew might derive from the forbidden article – such as selling it to a non-Jew or feeding it to one's animals. Selling it to a non-Jew brings monetary benefit and feeding it to an animal also beings monetary benefit because the owner thus saves the money he would otherwise have to expend on feed. (These are only examples.)
3:
Our mishnah lists five items from which it is forbidden to derive benefit: wine, vinegar, a certain kind of earthenware, certain kinds of hides and meat.
4:
The Torah [Deuteronomy 32:37-38] says that it will ultimately be said of the disappointed and frustrated idolators –
Where are their gods,the rock in whom they sought refuge,who ate the fat of their offerings and drank their libation wine? Let them rise up to your help,and let them be a shield unto you!
Rambam, in his Book of the Commandments [Negative Commandment #194] says that this verse is the origin of the prohibition of Yeyn Nesekh.
5:
Wine which has been handled by a non-Jew is forbidden to be used by a Jew. Such wine is termed in Hebrew yeyn nesekh [libation wine] or stam yeynam [simply non-Jewish wine]. The term originally referred to wine that served for libations in non-Jewish religious ceremonies; but later it came to include all wines that had passed through non-Jewish hands. The Gemara [AZ 31a] specifically prohibits non-Jewish wine. Other commodities gradually disappeared from the original list of prohibited items mentioned in explanation #1 above. For example, the Gemara [AZ 36a] discusses the circumstances in which non-Jewish oil became permitted again. But the prohibition of non-Jewish wine was never abrogated and never fell into desuetude.
6:
The Gemara [AZ 30b] distinguishes between three categories of forbidden non-Jewish wine:
- Yeyn nesekh, which is wine that had actually be used in a pagan libation;
- Stam yeynam, which is non-Jewish wine and it is not known whether if was used for religious purposes or not;
- Unsealed Jewish wine which had been left with a non-Jew for safe-keeping.
7:
Gradually, over the centuries, the attitude towards non-Jewish wine was relaxed, though never abandoned. But in Mishnaic and Talmudic times it was rigorously imposed.
To be continued.
DISCUSSION:
In AZ 021 I wrote in a rather sarcastic vein: I am not sure that I would be happy if a physician – Jew or gentile – were to apply worms from a dunghill to an open wound on my skin! Three people have written to me about this matter and since each of them says something that the others have not said I shall present here all three.
Ron Kaminsky writes:
You might be interested to know that modern medicine has returned to using blowfly larvae (grown under sterile conditions) to treat wounds which do not respond to other treatments. See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Blow-fly&oldid=237845791#Maggot_Therapy (there are no wound images there). So this treatment actually does have some medical basis behind it, unlike blood-letting and such.

Re'uven Artzi writes:
Concerning the use of dunghill worms to treat wounds: it would seem that our sages knew something about medicine in those days. Today, in fact, we use their 'primitive' methods. Professor Rachel Gilon, from the Medical School in Jerusalem, published a scientific article on the results of using greenfly larvae: they eat the abscess etc in necrotic wounds, for example. And also, Maggot Therapy. As we know, these larvae reproduce in dunghills and any moist organic matter.

Jim Feldman writes:
In wartime festering wounds prior to the miracle of antibiotics were as lethal as the bullets. I do not know when exactly the cure was developed, but by the Civil War (1861-65) in the US, some surgeons were applying maggots – the pupal stage of flies – to festering wounds. The maggots were remarkably effective in removing diseased and dead tissue and preventing the dread onset of gangrene. They did not harm healthy tissue. I know not of the other cures you mention, though strong vinegar could be antiseptic and induce coagulation, but if you translate the word that you rendered as "worms" as "maggots from the dunghill," you have to score a big one for the wisdom of the elders. Maggots are still used in modern medicine and can cure wounds that no other technique works on. A quick Google search on "maggots in medicine" will bring up lots of examples.


Donation Form