Avodah Zarah 075

נושא: AZ

BET MIDRASH VIRTUALI

Red Line

Green Line

If a vat [lined] with stone is tarred by a non-Jew [a Jew] should scour it and it is pure; [if it was lined] with wood, Rabbi says [the Jew] should scour it but the [rest of] the sages say that he should scrape off the tar; [if it was lined] with ceramics even if [the Jew] scrapes off the tar it is [still] forbidden.

1:
We are fast approaching the end of this tractate, and our present mishnah is the last one to deal with the issues involved in yeyn nesekh.

2:
Our mishnah is concerned with the construction or renovation of a vat. You will recall that a vat was the pit into which grapes were thrown after harvesting so that they could be trampled and the juice flow into the neighbouring pit. Obviously, it would be more than just convenient if both the vat and the pit were lined. This would not only keep the produce clean but it would also prevent seepage into the ground, which was just a waste of produce and money.

3:
From our present mishnah it seems that three kinds of lining were used in the construction of a vat: stone, wood and ceramics. The enquiring mind will ask, of course, what has the lining of a vat to do with yeyn nesekh? The Gemara [AZ 74b] explains that it was the custom to smear wine onto the lining of tar in order to mitigate the stench of the tar. If the work was done by a non-Jew then the added wine was, of course, yeyn nesekh and had to be removed if it was not to contaminate all the wine that would be processed in the vat.

4:
Our mishnah teaches that if the vat was lined with stone the walls and floor of the vat must be scoured. The Gemara [AZ 74b-75a] asks:

With what does one scour them?

Two answers are given:

Rav says: with water; Rabbah bar Bar-Ḥanah says: with ashes.

But the intention is not clear, so the Gemara delves deeper:

When Rav says with water, [does he mean] with water and not with ashes; and when Rabbah bar Bar-Ḥanah says with ashes [does he mean] with ashes and not with water?

The Gemara now modifies the question:

Did Rav mean with water and then with ashes, and did Rabbah bar Bar-Ḥanah mean with ashes and then with water?

The answer given is as follows:

There is no [real] difference between them: one is referring to what dry [wine] and the other to [wine that is still] moist.

In other words, if the traces of wine had dried in the vat, it must be rinsed with water and then scoured with ashes; but if the wine covering the tar was still moist it must first be scoured with ashes and then rinsed with water.

5:
Apparently, careful investigation was required to make sure that no yeyn nesekh remained. The Gemara [AZ 74b] recounts:

A man once came before Rabbi Ḥiyya and said to him, 'Provide for me a man to purify my winepress.' [Rabbi Ḥiyya] said to [his nephew] Rav, 'Go with him and see that there is no ground for complaint against me in the Bet ha-Midrash [that no error be made that some other sage would later disqualify the man's wine].' Rav went and noticed that [the sides of the vat] were very smooth; so he said [to himself], 'Here it will surely be enough just to scour.' But as he proceeded [with his examination] he noticed a crack at the bottom and saw that it was full of wine; so he said, 'Here it will not be sufficient with scouring but it will have to be scraped.' That is what my uncle meant when he said to me, 'See that there is no ground for complaint against me in the Bet ha-Midrash.'

6:
This last comment of Rav's relates to the continuation of our mishnah: if the lining of the vat was wood it was not sufficient to scour the tarring but it must be completely scraped off. This is because wood is much more absorbent than stone. (The more lenient view of Rabbi, the editor of the Mishnah, is not accepted halakhah.)

7:
This explains also the last clause of our mishnah: if the vat was lined with ceramics which were then smeared with tar and wine the vat could not be used at all for kosher wine because ceramics are so absorbent that it would not be possible to remove all the yeyn nesekh that had seeped into the clay.

Nothing can bring greater pleasure to a teacher than when one of his students comes up with an answer to a question that had eluded him. In AZ 072 we learned that if the bird that was set free during the ceremony of the purification of the leper got mixed up with other birds they are all forbidden. I then added:

I do not know how anyone could know that one particular bird was a leper's bird, so why were not all birds forbidden – just in case?

Amnon Ron'el provides the answer. He read carefully the account of the ceremony and noticed:

The priest shall order one of the birds slaughtered … he shall take the live bird … and dip … the live bird in the blood of the bird that was slaughtered… He shall then … set the live bird free in the open country.

Amnon writes:

It could be recognized by the signs of blood in which it had been dipped.

Because of the incidence of Tish'ah b'Av the next shiur will be sent out next week. In the mean time you may care to read what I have written about Tish'ah b'Av. Fast well.

Green Line