json/Mishnah/Seder Nezikin/Mishnah Avodah Zarah/English/merged.json

{
    "title": "Mishnah Avodah Zarah",
    "language": "en",
    "versionTitle": "merged",
    "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org/Mishnah_Avodah_Zarah",
    "text": [
        [
            "On the <b>three days before the festivals of gentiles</b> the following actions are prohibited, as they would bring joy to the gentile, who would subsequently give thanks to his object of idol worship on his festival: It is <b>prohibited to engage in business with them; to lend</b> items <b>to them or to borrow</b> items <b>from them; to lend</b> money <b>to them or to borrow</b> money <b>from them;</b> and <b>to repay</b> debts owed to <b>them or to collect repayment</b> of debts <b>from them. Rabbi Yehuda says: One may collect repayment</b> of debts <b>from them because this causes</b> the gentile <b>distress.</b> The Rabbis <b>said to</b> Rabbi Yehuda: <b>Even though he is distressed now,</b> when he repays the money, <b>he is happy afterward</b> that he is relieved of the debt, and therefore there is concern that he will give thanks to his object of idol worship on his festival.",
            "<b>Rabbi Yishmael says:</b> On <b>the three</b> days <b>before</b> the festivals of gentiles <b>and</b> on <b>the three</b> days <b>after them,</b> it is <b>prohibited</b> to engage in business with those gentiles. <b>And the Rabbis say:</b> It is <b>prohibited</b> to engage in business with them <b>before their festivals,</b> but it is <b>permitted</b> to engage in business with them <b>after their festivals.</b>",
            "<b>And these are the festivals of gentiles: Kalenda, Saturnalia, and Kratesis, and the day of the festival of their kings, and the birthday</b> of the king, <b>and</b> the anniversary of <b>the day of the death</b> of the king. This is <b>the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: Every death that includes</b> public <b>burning</b> is a festival that <b>includes idol worship, and</b> any death <b>that does not include</b> public <b>burning</b> is <b>not</b> a festival that <b>includes idol worship. But</b> in the case of <b>the day of shaving his,</b> i.e., a gentile’s, <b>beard and his locks, and the day of</b> his <b>ascent from the sea, and the day that he left prison, and</b> also in the case of <b>a gentile who prepared</b> a wedding <b>feast for his son</b> and celebrates on that day, engaging in business <b>is prohibited only</b> on <b>that day and</b> with <b>that man.</b>",
            "In the case of <b>a city in which there is</b> active <b>idol worship,</b> it is <b>permitted</b> to engage in business transactions with gentiles who live <b>outside of</b> the city. If the <b>idol worship</b> is <b>outside</b> the city, it is <b>permitted</b> to engage in business <b>within</b> the city. <b>What is</b> the <i>halakha</i> with regard to <b>traveling there,</b> a place where a pagan festival is being celebrated? <b>When the road is designated</b> only <b>for that place,</b> it is <b>prohibited</b> to use the road, as onlookers will assume that the traveler intends to join the festival. <b>But if one were able to travel on it to</b> arrive at <b>another place,</b> it is <b>permitted</b> to use the road to reach the place that is observing the festival. With regard to <b>a city in which idol worship</b> is practiced <b>and in which there are stores that are adorned</b> for the sake of idol worship <b>and</b> there are others <b>that are not adorned, this was</b> in fact <b>an incident</b> that occurred <b>in Beit She’an, and the Sages said:</b> With regard to <b>the adorned</b> shops, it is <b>prohibited</b> to buy from them, <b>but</b> in the case of <b>those that are not adorned</b> it is <b>permitted.</b>",
            "<b>These are the items that</b> it is <b>prohibited to sell to a gentile</b> at any time of year, as they are used specifically for idol worship: <b><i>Itzterubalin</i>, <i>benot shuaḥ</i>, <i>petotarot</i>, frankincense, and a white rooster. Rabbi Yehuda says:</b> It is <b>permitted to sell a white rooster to</b> a gentile provided that it is sold <b>along with</b> other types of <b>roosters. But when it is</b> sold <b>by itself, one</b> should <b>cut off its toe and sell it to</b> the gentile, <b>because</b> they <b>do not sacrifice a defective</b> animal <b>to</b> their object of <b>idol worship. And</b> with regard to <b>all remaining items, without specification</b> it is <b>permitted</b> to sell them, <b>but</b> with <b>specification</b> it is <b>prohibited</b> to sell them. <b>Rabbi Meir says: Even</b> in the case of <b>a good palm tree, <i>ḥatzav</i>, and <i>naklav</i>,</b> it is <b>prohibited to sell</b> them <b>to gentiles.</b>",
            "In <b>a place where</b> the residents <b>were accustomed to sell small domesticated animals to gentiles, one may sell</b> them. In <b>a place where they were not accustomed to sell</b> them, <b>one may not sell</b> them. <b>But in every place, one may not sell them large livestock, calves, or foals,</b> whether these animals are <b>whole or damaged.</b> The Sages prohibited these sales lest a Jew’s animal perform labor for the gentile on Shabbat in violation of an explicit Torah prohibition, as explained in the Gemara. <b>Rabbi Yehuda permits</b> the sale <b>of a damaged</b> animal because it is incapable of performing labor, <b>and ben Beteira permits</b> the sale <b>of a horse</b> for riding, because riding a horse on Shabbat is not prohibited by Torah law.",
            "<b>One may not sell bears, or lions, or any item that can cause injury to the public, to</b> gentiles. <b>One may not build with them a basilica [<i>basileki</i>], a tribunal [<i>gardom</i>], a stadium [<i>itztadeyya</i>], or a platform. But one may build with them small platforms [<i>bimmusiot</i>] and bathhouses.</b> Even in this case, once <b>he reaches the arched chamber</b> in the bath <b>where</b> the gentiles <b>put up</b> objects of <b>idol worship, it is prohibited to build</b> it.",
            "<b>And one may not fashion jewelry for</b> an object of <b>idol worship,</b> and this applies to jewelry such as <b>necklaces [<i>katla’ot</i>], nose rings, and rings. Rabbi Eliezer says:</b> If one fashions them in exchange <b>for payment,</b> it is <b>permitted.</b> The mishna returns to the issue of selling items to gentiles: <b>One may not sell to</b> a gentile any item <b>that is attached to the ground, but one may sell</b> such an item <b>once it is severed</b> from the ground. <b>Rabbi Yehuda says:</b> It is not necessary to sever the item from the ground; rather, <b>one may sell it on the condition that it be severed.</b> <b>One may not rent a house to</b> a gentile <b>in Eretz Yisrael, and needless to say</b> one may not rent <b>fields</b> to them, as explained in the Gemara. <b>And in Syria</b> <b>one may rent houses to</b> gentiles, <b>but</b> one may <b>not</b> rent <b>fields. And outside of Eretz</b> Yisrael <b>one may sell houses and rent fields to</b> gentiles; this is <b>the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yosei says: In Eretz Yisrael one may rent houses to</b> gentiles <b>but</b> one may <b>not</b> rent <b>fields. And in Syria one may sell houses to them and rent fields, and outside of Eretz</b> Yisrael <b>one may sell</b> both <b>these,</b> houses, <b>and those,</b> fields.",
            "<b>Even in a place</b> with regard to <b>which</b> the Sages <b>said</b> that it is permitted for a Jew <b>to rent</b> a house to a gentile, <b>they did not say</b> that one may rent it <b>for</b> use as <b>a residence, because</b> the gentile will <b>bring</b> objects of <b>idol worship into it, as it is stated: “You shall not bring an abomination into your house”</b> (Deuteronomy 7:26), and this is still considered the house of a Jew. <b>And</b> for the same reason, <b>in every place, one may not rent a bathhouse to</b> a gentile, <b>since it is called by the name of</b> the owner, and onlookers will think that the Jew is operating it on Shabbat."
        ],
        [
            "<b>One may not keep an animal in the inns [<i>befundekaot</i>] of gentiles because they are suspected of bestiality.</b> Since even gentiles are prohibited from engaging in bestiality, a Jew who places his animal there is guilty of violating the prohibition: “You shall not put a stumbling block before the blind” (Leviticus 19:14). <b>And a woman may not seclude herself with</b> gentiles <b>because they are suspected of</b> engaging in <b>forbidden sexual relations. And</b> any <b>person may not seclude himself with</b> gentiles <b>because they are suspected of bloodshed.</b> <b>A Jewish woman may not deliver</b> the child of <b>a gentile woman, because</b> in doing so <b>she is delivering a child</b> who will engage in <b>idol worship. But</b> one <b>may</b> allow <b>a gentile woman</b> to <b>deliver</b> the child of <b>a Jewish woman.</b> Similarly, <b>a Jewish woman may not nurse the child of a gentile woman, but</b> one <b>may</b> allow <b>a gentile woman</b> to <b>nurse the child of a Jewish woman</b> while the gentile woman is <b>on</b> the Jewish woman’s <b>property.</b> ",
            "The mishna discusses the issue of accepting certain professional services from a gentile. <b>One may be treated by</b> gentiles, provided that it is <b>monetary treatment, but not personal treatment. And one may not have his hair cut by them anywhere,</b> due to the danger that the gentile will kill him with the razor; this is <b>the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: In the public thoroughfare,</b> it is <b>permitted</b> to have one’s hair cut by a gentile, <b>but not</b> when the Jew and gentile are <b>alone together.</b>",
            "This mishna discusses the halakhic status of various items that belong to gentiles. <b>These are items</b> that <b>belong to gentiles</b> and <b>are prohibited</b> to Jews, <b>and their prohibition is</b> that of <b>an item from which</b> deriving <b>benefit is prohibited: Wine, and vinegar belonging to gentiles that was originally wine, and Hadrianic earthenware, and hides</b> with a tear opposite the <b>heart. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says:</b> A hide is <b>prohibited</b> only <b>when</b> the <b>tear</b> around its heart is <b>circular,</b> but if it is <b>elongated</b> it is <b>permitted,</b> as gentiles will sacrifice a heart only when it has been removed by a circular laceration. <b>Meat that enters the</b> house of <b>idol worship</b> is <b>permitted, and</b> meat <b>that exits</b> this house is <b>prohibited, because it is</b> considered <b>as offerings to the dead,</b> i.e., to idols; this is <b>the statement of Rabbi Akiva.</b> With regard to <b>those going to a festival of idolatry [<i>tarput</i>],</b> it is <b>prohibited to engage in business with them. And</b> with regard to <b>those who are coming</b> from it, it is <b>permitted</b> to engage in business with them. ",
            "<b>Wineskins and jugs</b> belonging <b>to gentiles,</b> which have <b>a Jew’s wine contained in them,</b> are <b>prohibited</b> to Jews, <b>and their prohibition is</b> that of <b>an item from which</b> deriving <b>benefit is prohibited;</b> this is <b>the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: Their prohibition is not</b> that of <b>an item from which</b> deriving <b>benefit is prohibited.</b> Residual grape <b>seeds and grape skins belonging to gentiles,</b> which are left behind after the grapes are crushed for wine, are <b>prohibited, and their prohibition is</b> that of <b>an item from which</b> deriving <b>benefit is prohibited;</b> this is <b>the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: Moist</b> grape residues are <b>prohibited,</b> but <b>dry</b> residues are <b>permitted.</b> <b>Fish stew [<i>murayes</i>] and cheese of Beit Unyaki belonging to gentiles are prohibited, and their prohibition is</b> that of <b>an item from which</b> deriving <b>benefit is prohibited.</b> This is <b>the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: Their prohibition is not</b> that of <b>an item from which</b> deriving <b>benefit is prohibited.</b> ",
            "<b>Rabbi Yehuda said: Rabbi Yishmael asked Rabbi Yehoshua</b> a series of questions <b>while they were traveling along the road.</b> Rabbi Yishmael <b>said to him: For what</b> reason <b>did</b> the Sages <b>prohibit</b> the <b>cheeses of gentiles?</b> Rabbi Yehoshua <b>said to him: Because</b> gentiles <b>curdle</b> cheese <b>with the stomach</b> contents <b>of</b> an unslaughtered <b>animal carcass,</b> and as the carcass of an unslaughtered animal is not kosher, cheese that is curdled with it is likewise prohibited. In response, Rabbi Yishmael <b>said to him: But aren’t the stomach</b> contents <b>of a burnt-offering</b> subject to a more <b>stringent</b> prohibition <b>than the stomach</b> contents <b>of</b> an unslaughtered <b>animal carcass?</b> And yet <b>they said: A priest who is open-minded [<i>shedato yafa</i>]</b> with regard to what he eats <b>may swallow [<i>shorefah</i>]</b> the stomach contents of a burnt-offering while they are <b>raw, and</b> the other Sages <b>did not agree with him. But</b> the Sages <b>said: One may not</b> derive <b>benefit</b> from the stomach contents of a burnt-offering <i>ab initio</i>, <b>and</b> if one did derive benefit from them, he is <b>not</b> liable for <b>misusing</b> consecrated property. According to both opinions, deriving benefit from the stomach contents of a burnt-offering is not prohibited by Torah law. Since the <i>halakha</i> with regard to a burnt-offering is more stringent than that of an animal carcass, why would deriving benefit from the carcass be prohibited, while deriving benefit from the burnt-offering is permitted? Rabbi Yehoshua <b>said to</b> Rabbi Yishmael: The cheese of gentiles is prohibited <b>because they curdle it in the stomach</b> contents <b>of calves</b> used for <b>idol worship.</b> Since it is prohibited to derive benefit from such calves, cheese curdled in their stomach contents is also prohibited. Rabbi Yishmael <b>said to him: If</b> that is <b>so, why didn’t</b> the Sages <b>prohibit</b> deriving any <b>benefit</b> from the cheese, instead of merely prohibiting its consumption? Instead of answering Rabbi Yishmael, Rabbi Yehoshua <b>diverted his</b> attention <b>to another matter</b> and <b>said to him: Yishmael, how do you read</b> the following verse in the Song of Songs (1:2)? Do you read it as: <b>For Your love [<i>dodekha</i>] is better than wine,</b> or as: <b>For your love [<i>dodayikh</i>] is better</b> than wine? The first version, which is in the masculine form, would be a reference to God, whereas the second version, in the feminine, would be a reference to the Jewish people. Rabbi Yishmael <b>said to him</b> that it should be read in the feminine: <b>For your love [<i>dodayikh</i>] is better</b> than wine. Rabbi Yehoshua <b>said to him: The matter is not so, as another</b> verse <b>teaches with regard to it: “Your ointments [<i>shemanekha</i>] have a goodly fragrance”</b> (Song of Songs 1:3). This phrase, which appears in the next verse, is written in the masculine form, and therefore it is determined that the preceding verse can also be understood in the masculine form.",
            " This mishna lists items belonging to gentiles which it is prohibited to consume, but from which it is permitted to derive benefit. <b>And these are items</b> that belong <b>to gentiles</b> and are <b>prohibited, but their prohibition is not</b> that of <b>an item from which</b> deriving <b>benefit is prohibited: Milk that was milked by a gentile and a Jew did not see him</b> performing this action, <b>and their bread and oil.</b> The mishna notes that <b>Rabbi</b> Yehuda HaNasi <b>and his court permitted the oil</b> of gentiles entirely. The mishna resumes its list: <b>And boiled and pickled</b> vegetables, <b>whose</b> usual <b>manner</b> of preparation involves <b>adding wine and vinegar to them, and minced <i>tarit</i></b> fish, <b>and brine that does not have a <i>kilbit</i> fish floating in it, and <i>ḥilak</i>, and a sliver of <i>ḥiltit</i>, and <i>salkondit</i> salt</b> (see 39b); all <b>these are prohibited, but their prohibition is not</b> that of <b>item from which</b> deriving <b>benefit is prohibited.</b> ",
            "<b>And these are permitted for consumption: Milk that was milked by a gentile and a Jew watched him</b> doing so; <b>and honey; and grape clusters [<i>davdevaniyyot</i>]</b> which, <b>despite the fact that they are dripping</b> juice, <b>are not subject to</b> the <i>halakhot</i> of <b>susceptibility</b> to ritual impurity caused by contact with that <b>liquid; and pickled</b> vegetables <b>whose</b> usual <b>manner</b> of preparation <b>does not</b> involve <b>adding wine and vinegar to them; and <i>tarit</i></b> fish <b>that is not minced; and brine that has fish in it; and the leaf of a <i>ḥiltit</i></b> plant; <b>and rolled olive cakes [<i>geluskaot</i>].</b> <b>Rabbi Yosei says: Overripe</b> olives <b>are prohibited. Locusts that come from</b> a salesman’s <b>basket are prohibited,</b> whereas those that come <b>from the storeroom [<i>heftek</i>] are permitted; and likewise with regard to the portion of the produce designated for the priest [<i>teruma</i>],</b> as will be explained in the Gemara."
        ],
        [
            "<b>All statues are forbidden,</b> i.e., it is prohibited to derive benefit from them, <b>because they are worshipped</b> at least <b>once a year;</b> this is <b>the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say:</b> The <b>only</b> type of statue that is <b>forbidden</b> is <b>any</b> statue <b>that has in its hand a staff, or a bird, or an orb,</b> as these are indications that this statue is designated for idolatry. If the statue is holding a different item, it may be assumed that the statue was fashioned for ornamental purposes and not for worship. <b>Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says:</b> It is prohibited to derive benefit <b>even</b> from <b>any</b> statue <b>that has any item</b> whatsoever <b>in its hand.</b>",
            "In the case of <b>one who finds</b> unidentifiable <b>fragments of statues, these are permitted,</b> i.e., one may derive benefit from them. If one <b>found</b> an object in <b>the figure of a hand or</b> in <b>the figure of a foot, these are forbidden, as</b> objects <b>similar to those are worshipped.</b>",
            "In the case of <b>one who finds vessels, and upon them is a figure of the sun, a figure of the moon,</b> or <b>a figure of a dragon, he must take them</b> and cast them <b>into the Dead Sea</b> and not derive any benefit from them, as they are assumed to be objects of idol worship. <b>Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says:</b> Those figures <b>that</b> are <b>upon respectable</b> vessels <b>are forbidden.</b> Those <b>that are upon disgraceful vessels are permitted.</b> <b>Rabbi Yosei says:</b> When one encounters an idol, he should <b>grind</b> the idol <b>and throw</b> the dust <b>to the wind or cast</b> it <b>into the sea.</b> The Rabbis <b>said to him:</b> What is the good of that? <b>That also</b> gives a Jew benefit from the idol, as it <b>becomes fertilizer</b> for his crops, <b>and</b> deriving any kind of benefit is prohibited, as <b>it is stated:</b> “And <b>nothing of the proscribed items shall cleave to your hand”</b> (Deuteronomy 13:18).",
            "A wise gentile, <b>Proclus ben Plospus,</b> once <b>asked</b> a question <b>of Rabban Gamliel in</b> the city of <b>Akko when he was bathing in the bathhouse of</b> the Greek god <b>Aphrodite.</b> Proclus <b>said to him: It is written in your Torah:</b> “And <b>nothing of the proscribed items shall cleave to your hand”</b> (Deuteronomy 13:18). <b>For what reason do you bathe</b> before an idol <b>in the bathhouse of Aphrodite?</b> Rabban Gamliel <b>said to him: One may not answer</b> questions related to Torah <b>in the bathhouse. And when he left</b> the bathhouse, Rabban Gamliel gave him several answers. <b>He said to him: I did not come into its domain; it came into my domain.</b> The bathhouse existed before the statue dedicated to Aphrodite was erected. Furthermore, people <b>do not say: Let us make a bathhouse</b> as <b>an adornment for Aphrodite; rather,</b> they <b>say: Let us make</b> a statue of <b>Aphrodite</b> as <b>an adornment for the bathhouse.</b> Therefore, the main structure is not the Aphrodite statue, but the bathhouse. Rabban Gamliel continued: <b>Alternatively,</b> there is another answer: Even <b>if</b> people would <b>give you a lot of money, you would not enter</b> before <b>your</b> object of <b>idol worship naked, or</b> as <b>one who experienced a seminal emission</b> who comes to the bathhouse to purify himself, <b>nor</b> would you <b>urinate before it. This</b> statue <b>stands upon the sewage pipe and all the people urinate before it.</b> There is no prohibition in this case, as <b>it is stated</b> in the verse <b>only: “Their gods”</b> (see Deuteronomy 12:2), which indicates that a statue <b>that</b> people <b>treat as a deity</b> is <b>forbidden,</b> but one <b>that</b> people <b>do not treat</b> with the respect that is <b>due to a deity</b> is <b>permitted.</b>",
            "With regard to the <i>halakha</i> in the case of <b>the gentiles who worship the mountains and the hills,</b> the mountains and hills <b>are permitted, but what is upon them is forbidden.</b> It is not prohibited to derive benefit from the mountains and hills themselves, and they can be used for planting, harvesting, and the like. But if gentiles coated them with gold or silver, it is prohibited to derive benefit from the coating, <b>as it is stated:</b> “The graven images of their gods shall you burn with fire; <b>you shall not covet the silver or the gold that is on them,</b> nor take it for yourself, lest you be snared by it; for it is an abomination to the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 7:25). <b>Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says</b> with regard to the verse: “You shall destroy all the places where the nations that you are to dispossess served their gods, upon the high mountains, and upon the hills, and under every leafy tree” (Deuteronomy 12:2): The mitzva to destroy objects of idol worship applies to <b>“their gods, upon the</b> high <b>mountains,” but not</b> to <b>the mountains</b> themselves that are <b>their gods.</b> Similarly it applies to <b>“their gods…upon the hills,” but not</b> to <b>the hills</b> themselves that are <b>their gods.</b> The mishna asks: <b>And for what reason,</b> then, is <b>an <i>ashera</i> forbidden?</b> Doesn’t the verse also state: “And under every leafy tree,” which indicates that the mitzva to destroy objects of idol worship does not apply to the trees themselves? The mishna answers: It is <b>because it</b> is the product of <b>human involvement</b> and did not grow by itself, <b>and</b> the <i>halakha</i> is that <b>anything that</b> is the product of <b>human involvement</b> is <b>forbidden.</b> <b>Rabbi Akiva says: I will explain and decide</b> the matter <b>before you.</b> The verse does not indicate limitations to the halakhic definition of idols; rather, it is simply giving indicators of prevalent idolatrous practice: <b>Everywhere that you find a high mountain, or an elevated hill, or a leafy tree, know that there is idol worship there.</b>",
            "In the case of <b>one whose house was adjacent to</b> a house of <b>idol worship and</b> the dividing wall <b>fell,</b> it is <b>prohibited to rebuild it. What should he do?</b> He should <b>withdraw into his own</b> property <b>four cubits and build</b> the wall there. In talmudic times, external walls to homes were often built in two parts, with a functional space between them. If the space between the two parts of the wall <b>belonged to him and to</b> the house of <b>idol worship,</b> the area <b>is treated</b> as <b>half and half</b>  with regard to withdrawing into his property before rebuilding the wall; he may build the wall four cubits from the middle of that space. <b>The stones of</b> the fallen wall, <b>its wood, and its dust, transmit impurity like a creeping animal,</b> i.e., one who touches them becomes impure like one who touches a creeping animal, <b>as it is stated:</b> “And you shall not bring an abomination into your house, and be accursed like it; <b>you shall detest it [<i>shakketz teshakketzennu</i>],</b> and you shall abhor it; for it is a proscribed item” (Deuteronomy 7:26). The term <i>shakketz</i> is used in a different form, <i>shekketz</i>, with regard to creeping animals. <b>Rabbi Akiva says:</b> Those items transmit impurity <b>like a menstruating woman, as it is stated: “You will put them far away as a menstruating woman; you shall say to it: Go away”</b> (Isaiah 30:22). <b>Just as a menstruating woman transmits impurity by carrying,</b> as one who moves a menstruating woman, even without touching her, becomes impure, <b>so too,</b> objects of <b>idol worship transmit impurity by carrying.</b>",
            "With regard to idol worship <b>there are three</b> types of <b>houses,</b> each with its own <i>halakhot</i>. <b>A house that one built initially for</b> the purpose of <b>idol worship is forbidden,</b> i.e., it is prohibited to derive benefit from such a house. If one <b>plastered</b> a house <b>or cemented it for</b> the purpose of <b>idol worship, and he</b> thereby <b>added</b> a layer to the walls of the house, one <b>removes that which he added,</b> and the rest of the house is permitted. If one <b>brought</b> an object of <b>idol worship into</b> a house temporarily <b>and</b> then <b>removed it,</b> the house <b>is</b> then <b>permitted.</b> With regard to idol worship <b>there are three</b> types of <b>stones,</b> each with its own <i>halakhot</i>. <b>A stone that</b> one <b>initially hewed for</b> use in <b>a platform [<i>bimos</i>]</b> for an idol <b>is forbidden.</b> If one <b>plastered</b> a stone <b>or cemented it for the sake of idol worship, one removes that which he plastered or cemented and</b> the stone <b>is permitted.</b> If one <b>erected</b> an object of <b>idol worship upon</b> a stone <b>and</b> subsequently <b>removed it,</b> the stone <b>is</b> then <b>permitted.</b> <b>There are three</b> types of <b>trees</b> that were used as part of idolatrous rites <b>[<i>ashera</i>]: A tree that one initially planted for the sake of idol worship is forbidden,</b> and one may not derive benefit from any part of the tree. If one <b>lopped</b> off part of the trunk of a tree <b>or trimmed</b> its branches <b>for the sake of idol worship,</b> i.e., to worship that which would regrow there, <b>and</b> the tree’s trunk or limbs <b>regrew, one removes that which has regrown</b> and burn it. The remainder of the tree is then permitted. If one <b>erected</b> an object of <b>idol worship beneath</b> a tree <b>and</b> subsequently <b>removed it, it is permitted</b> to derive benefit from the tree. <b>Which</b> tree <b>is</b> deemed forbidden as <b>an <i>ashera</i>? Any</b> tree <b>that has</b> an object of <b>idol worship beneath it. Rabbi Shimon says: Any</b> tree <b>that</b> people <b>worship. And</b> there was <b>an incident in Tzaidan involving a tree that</b> people <b>would worship, and</b> Jews <b>found beneath it a heap</b> of stones. <b>Rabbi Shimon said to them: Examine this heap</b> of stones. <b>And they examined it and found in it</b> an idolatrous <b>image.</b> Rabbi Shimon <b>said to them: Since</b> it is <b>the image</b> that <b>they worship, we can permit</b> use of <b>the tree to</b> those who wish to derive benefit from it.",
            "With regard to an <i>ashera</i>, <b>one may not sit in its shade, but if one sat</b> in its shade he remains <b>ritually pure. And one may not pass beneath it, and if one passed</b> beneath it he is <b>ritually impure.</b> If the tree <b>was robbing the public,</b> i.e., if its branches extended over public property, <b>and one passed beneath it,</b> he remains <b>pure.</b> <b>One may plant vegetables underneath</b> an <i>ashera</i> <b>during the rainy season,</b> as the vegetables do not benefit from its shade; on the contrary, the tree’s foliage prevents the vegetables from being properly irrigated by the rain. <b>But</b> one may <b>not</b> plant vegetables under an <i>ashera</i> <b>during the summer,</b> as the shade benefits them. <b>And lettuce</b> may not be planted there at all, <b>neither in the summer nor in the rainy season,</b> because shade is always beneficial to lettuce. <b>Rabbi Yosei says:</b> One may <b>not</b> plant <b>vegetables</b> under an <i>ashera</i> <b>even during the rainy season, because the</b> tree’s <b>foliage [<i>shehaneviyya</i>] falls upon them and serves as fertilizer for them.</b>",
            "If one <b>took wood from</b> an <i>ashera</i>, it is <b>prohibited to</b> derive <b>benefit</b> from it. In a case where one <b>kindled</b> a fire in <b>an oven with</b> the wood, <b>if</b> it is <b>a new</b> oven and by kindling the fire he hardened the oven and made it stronger for use in the future, then the oven <b>must be shattered.</b> Since forbidden items were used in the process of forming the oven, one may not derive benefit from the use of the forbidden items. <b>But if</b> it is <b>an old</b> oven <b>it may be cooled;</b> it is prohibited to use the oven only while it is still hot. If one <b>baked bread with</b> wood from the <i>ashera</i> as the fuel, it is <b>prohibited to</b> derive <b>benefit</b> from the bread. If this bread <b>was intermingled with other</b> bread, it is <b>prohibited to</b> derive <b>benefit</b> from <b>all</b> the bread. <b>Rabbi Eliezer says:</b> One must take the <b>benefit</b> and <b>cast</b> it <b>into the Dead Sea.</b> In other words, one is not required to destroy all of the loaves. Instead, one should designate money equal in value to the wood that he used from the <i>ashera</i>, and he should destroy this money to offset the benefit he derived from the forbidden wood. The Rabbis <b>said to him: There is no</b> monetary <b>redemption for</b> objects that are forbidden due to <b>idol worship.</b> Once the bread becomes forbidden, it cannot be redeemed by having the value of the forbidden wood cast into the Dead Sea. If one <b>took</b> wood <b>from</b> an <i>ashera</i> for use as a weaving <b>shuttle [<i>karkor</i>],</b> it is <b>prohibited to</b> derive <b>benefit</b> from it. If one <b>wove a garment with it,</b> it is <b>prohibited to</b> derive <b>benefit</b> from the garment. If the garment <b>was intermingled with other</b> garments, <b>and</b> those <b>other</b> garments were intermingled <b>with others,</b> it is <b>prohibited to</b> derive <b>benefit</b> from <b>all of them. Rabbi Eliezer says:</b> One must take the <b>benefit</b> and <b>cast</b> it <b>into the Dead Sea.</b> The Rabbis <b>said to him: There is no</b> monetary <b>redemption for</b> objects that are forbidden due to <b>idol worship.</b>",
            "<b>How does one revoke</b> the idolatrous status of an <i>ashera</i>? If a gentile <b>trimmed</b> dry wood <b>or pruned</b> green wood from the tree for his own benefit, or if he <b>removed from it a stick, or a rod,</b> or <b>even a leaf, he has</b> thereby <b>revoked</b> its idolatrous status, as he has proven that he no longer worships it. If a gentile <b>shaved down</b> the tree <b>for its</b> own <b>sake,</b> to improve its appearance, it remains <b>prohibited</b> to derive benefit from it. If he shaved it down <b>not for its</b> own <b>sake,</b> it is <b>permitted.</b>"
        ],
        [
            "<b>Rabbi Yishmael says: Three stones</b> that are <b>adjacent to each other at</b> the <b>side of Mercury [<i>Markulis</i>] are prohibited,</b> as that idol was worshipped by tossing stones toward it, which then became part of the idol. <b>But</b> if there are only <b>two</b> stones, then they <b>are permitted. And the Rabbis say:</b> Those stones <b>that are adjacent to</b> Mercury and appear to have fallen from it <b>are prohibited. But</b> those stones <b>that are not adjacent to it are permitted.</b>",
            "If one <b>found money, a garment, or vessels at the head of</b> Mercury, <b>these are permitted.</b> If one found vine <b>branches</b> laden with clusters <b>of grapes, or wreaths</b> made <b>of stalks, or</b> containers of <b>wine, oil, or flour, or any</b> other <b>item the likes of which is sacrificed on the altar</b> there, it is <b>prohibited.</b>",
            "In the case of an object of <b>idol worship that had a garden or a bathhouse,</b> one <b>may derive benefit from them when</b> it is <b>not to</b> the <b>advantage</b> of the idol worship, i.e., when he does not pay for his use, <b>but</b> one <b>may not derive benefit from them</b> when it is <b>to</b> their <b>advantage,</b> i.e., if one is required to pay for his use. If the garden or bathhouse <b>belonged</b> jointly <b>to</b> the place of idol worship <b>and to others,</b> one <b>may derive benefit from them, both</b> when it is <b>to</b> their <b>advantage and when</b> it is <b>not to</b> their <b>advantage. </b>",
            "A gentile’s object of <b>idol worship</b> is <b>prohibited immediately,</b> i.e., as soon as it is fashioned for that purpose, <b>but a Jew’s</b> object of idol worship is <b>not prohibited until it is</b> actually <b>worshipped.</b> <b>A gentile can revoke</b> the status of <b>his</b> object of <b>idol worship and</b> the status of the idol <b>of another</b> gentile, <b>but a Jew cannot revoke</b> the status of the object of <b>idol worship of a gentile. One who revokes</b> the status of an object of <b>idol worship</b> thereby <b>revokes</b> the status of <b>its accessories.</b> But if he <b>revokes</b> the status of <b>its accessories,</b> its <b>accessories</b> alone are rendered <b>permitted, but</b> the object of idol worship <b>itself</b> remains <b>prohibited.</b>",
            "<b>How does</b> a gentile <b>revoke</b> the status of an object of idol worship? If <b>he cut off the tip of its ear,</b> or <b>the tip of its nose,</b> or <b>its fingertip;</b> or if <b>he crushed it, even though he did not remove</b> any <b>part of it,</b> in all these cases he thereby <b>revoked</b> its status as an object of idol worship. If he <b>spat before</b> the idol, <b>urinated before it, dragged it</b> on the ground, or <b>threw excrement at it,</b> the status of <b>this</b> idol <b>is not revoked,</b> as this is only a temporary display of scorn, and afterward the gentile might continue to worship the idol. If the gentile <b>sold it or mortgaged it, Rabbi</b> Yehuda HaNasi <b>says:</b> He thereby <b>revoked</b> its status. <b>And the Rabbis say</b> that he <b>did not revoke</b> its status.",
            "With regard to an object of <b>idol worship that was abandoned by its worshippers,</b> if it was abandoned <b>in peacetime,</b> it is <b>permitted,</b> as it was evidently abandoned by choice and this constitutes an implicit revocation of its status as an object of idol worship. If it was abandoned <b>in wartime,</b> it is <b>prohibited,</b> as it was not abandoned by choice. With regard to the stone <b>platforms of kings</b> upon which idols are placed in honor of the kings, <b>these are permitted, due to</b> the fact <b>that</b> the idol is <b>placed</b> on these platforms only <b>at the time that the kings pass by.</b>",
            "The gentiles <b>asked the</b> Jewish <b>Sages</b> who were <b>in Rome: If it is not</b> God’s <b>will</b> that people should engage <b>in idol worship, why does He not elimi-nate it?</b> The Sages <b>said to them: Were</b> people <b>worshipping</b> only <b>objects for which the world has no need, He would eliminate it.</b> But <b>they worship the sun and the moon</b> and <b>the stars and the constellations. Should He destroy His world because of the fools?</b> The gentiles <b>said to</b> the Sages: <b>If so, let Him destroy</b> those <b>objects</b> of idol worship <b>for which the world has no need and leave</b> those <b>objects for which the world</b> has <b>a need.</b> The Sages <b>said to them:</b> If that were to happen, <b>we would</b> thereby <b>be supporting the worshippers of those</b> objects for which the world has need, <b>as they</b> would <b>say: You should know that these are</b> truly <b>gods, as they were not eliminated</b> from the world, whereas the others were eliminated.",
            "One <b>may purchase from a gentile a winepress</b> in which the grapes have <b>been trodden</b> on, <b>despite</b> the fact <b>that</b> the gentile <b>takes</b> grapes <b>in his hand</b> from the winepress <b>and places</b> them <b>on the pile</b> that remains to be trodden on. <b>And</b> the gentile’s touch <b>does not render</b> the juice of the grapes <b>wine</b> used for <b>a libation</b> in idol worship, which is forbidden, <b>until it descends into the</b> collection <b>vat,</b> because until then it does not have the status of wine. Once the wine <b>descended into the</b> collection <b>vat, that which is in the vat</b> is <b>prohibited, and the rest,</b> which did not yet descend into the vat, is <b>permitted.</b>",
            "One <b>may tread</b> on grapes together <b>with the gentile in the winepress,</b> <b>but</b> one <b>may not harvest</b> grapes <b>with him.</b> After the harvest the grapes are brought to the winepress, which is ritually impure. This would render the grapes impure, and it is prohibited to render produce of Eretz Yisrael impure. In the case of <b>a Jew who produces</b> his wine <b>in</b> a state of <b>ritual impurity,</b> one <b>may not tread</b> on grapes <b>nor harvest</b> them <b>with him,</b> as it is prohibited to assist transgressors. <b>But</b> once he has produced his wine, one <b>may take</b> the <b>barrels to the winepress with him,</b> as the wine is already impure. <b>And</b> one <b>may</b> also <b>bring</b> the barrels <b>from the winepress</b> together <b>with him.</b> Similarly, in the case of <b>a baker who makes</b> his bread <b>in</b> a state of <b>ritual impurity,</b> one <b>may not knead or arrange</b> the dough in the shape of bread together <b>with him,</b> so as not to assist in a transgression. <b>But</b> one <b>may take</b> the <b>bread with him to the bread merchant [<i>lapalter</i>].</b>",
            "In the case of <b>a gentile who was found standing next to the wine</b> collection <b>vat, if there is a loan</b> owed <b>by</b> the owner of the wine vat <b>to</b> the gentile, the wine is <b>prohibited.</b> Since the gentile maintains that he has a right to the owner’s property he has no compunctions about touching the wine. But if <b>there is no loan</b> owed <b>by</b> the owner of the wine vat <b>to</b> the gentile, the wine is <b>permitted,</b> as it is assumed that the gentile did not touch the wine that was not his. If a gentile <b>fell into the</b> wine collection <b>vat and emerged</b> from it, or if <b>he measured</b> the wine in the winepress <b>with a pole</b> without touching it with his hands, or if <b>he cast a hornet</b> out of the wine <b>by</b> means of <b>a pole</b> and the pole touched the wine, <b>or where</b> the gentile <b>was removing the foam</b> that was <b>on</b> the <b>top of a fermenting barrel</b> of wine; <b>with regard to all these</b> cases <b>there was</b> such <b>an incident. And</b> the Sages <b>said</b> that the wine <b>may be sold</b> to gentiles, as it is permitted to derive benefit from the wine, but not to drink it. <b>And Rabbi Shimon deems</b> the wine <b>permitted</b> even for drinking. In a case where a gentile <b>took the barrel</b> of wine <b>and threw it, in his anger, into the</b> wine collection <b>vat, this was an incident</b> that occurred <b>and</b> the Sages <b>deemed</b> the wine <b>fit</b> for drinking.",
            "In the case of a Jew <b>who renders the wine of a gentile permitted</b> by treading the gentile’s grapes so that the wine can be sold to Jews, <b>and</b> although a Jew has not yet paid for the wine <b>he</b> then <b>places</b> the wine <b>in</b> the gentile’s <b>domain in a house that is open to a public thoroughfare</b> until he sells it, the <i>halakha</i> depends on the circumstances. If this occurs <b>in a city in which there are</b> both <b>gentiles and Jews,</b> the wine is <b>permitted,</b> as the gentile does not touch the wine lest the Jews see him doing so. If this occurs <b>in a city</b> in <b>which all its</b> inhabitants are <b>gentiles,</b> the wine is <b>prohibited unless</b> a Jew <b>sits and safeguards</b> the wine. <b>But the watchman is not required to sit and guard</b> the wine constantly; <b>even if he</b> frequently <b>leaves</b> the place <b>and comes in</b> again later, the wine is <b>permitted. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says:</b> The <b>domain of gentiles is</b> all <b>one,</b> as the Gemara will explain.",
            "In the case of a Jew <b>who renders the wine of a gentile permitted</b> by treading the gentile’s grapes so that the wine can be sold to Jews, <b>and he</b> then <b>places</b> the wine <b>in</b> the gentile’s <b>domain</b> until he sells it, the <i>halakha</i> depends on the circumstances. If <b>that one,</b> the gentile, <b>writes for</b> the Jew: <b>I received money from you</b> in payment for the wine, even though he did not yet receive the actual payment, the wine is <b>permitted.</b> This is because the wine is considered the Jew’s property and the gentile does not venture to touch it. <b>But if the Jew desires to remove</b> the wine <b>and</b> the gentile <b>does not allow him</b> to do so <b>until</b> the Jew <b>gives him the money</b> due to <b>him, this was an incident</b> that occurred <b>in Beit She’an and</b> the Sages <b>deemed</b> the wine <b>prohibited.</b> In this case the gentile believes that he has a lien upon the wine, and therefore he has no compunctions about touching it."
        ],
        [
            "In the case of a gentile <b>who hires</b> a Jewish <b>laborer to work with wine</b> used for an idolatrous <b>libation with him, his wage</b> is <b>forbidden,</b> i.e., it is prohibited for the Jew to derive benefit from his wage. If the gentile <b>hired him to do other work with him, even if he said to him</b> while he was working with him: <b>Transport the barrel of wine</b> used for <b>a libation for me from</b> this <b>place to</b> that <b>place, his wage</b> is <b>permitted,</b> i.e., the Jew is permitted to derive benefit from the money. With regard to a gentile <b>who rents</b> a Jew’s <b>donkey to carry wine</b> used for <b>a libation on it, its</b> rental <b>fee</b> is <b>forbidden.</b> If <b>he rented it to sit on it, even if a gentile placed his jug</b> of wine used for a libation <b>on it, its</b> rental <b>fee</b> is <b>permitted.</b>",
            "In the case of <b>wine</b> used for <b>a libation that fell on grapes, one rinses them and they are permitted. But if</b> the grapes <b>were cracked, they are forbidden.</b> In a case where the wine <b>fell on figs or on dates, if there is</b> sufficient wine <b>in them to impart flavor, they are forbidden. And</b> there was <b>an incident involving Boethus ben Zunen, who transported dried figs in a ship, and a barrel of wine</b> used for <b>a libation broke and fell on them, and he asked the Sages</b> as to the <i>halakha</i>, <b>and</b> the Sages <b>deemed</b> the figs <b>permitted.</b> <b>This is the principle: Anything that benefits</b> from a forbidden item <b>imparting flavor</b> to it, i.e., the forbidden item contributes a positive taste to it, is <b>forbidden,</b> and <b>anything that does not benefit</b> from a forbidden item <b>imparting flavor</b> to it is <b>permitted, such as</b> forbidden <b>vinegar that fell onto</b> split <b>beans,</b> as the flavor imparted by the vinegar does not enhance the taste of the beans.",
            "With regard to <b>a gentile who was transporting barrels of wine from</b> one <b>place to</b> another <b>place</b> together <b>with a Jew, if</b> the wine <b>was under the presumption of being supervised,</b> it is <b>permitted.</b> But <b>if</b> the Jew <b>notified him that he was going far away,</b> the wine is forbidden if the Jew left for <b>a sufficient</b> amount of time <b>for</b> the gentile <b>to bore a hole [<i>sheyishtom</i>]</b> in the barrel, <b>seal</b> it again with plaster, <b>and</b> for the plaster to <b>dry. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says:</b> The wine is forbidden only if it was <b>sufficient</b> time <b>for</b> the gentile <b>to open the barrel</b> by removing the stopper altogether, <b>stop</b> it again by making a new stopper, <b>and</b> for the new stopper to <b>dry.</b>",
            "With regard to <b>one who placed his wine in a wagon or on a ship</b> with a gentile, <b>and went on his way by a shortcut [<i>bekappendarya</i>],</b> such that the gentile does not know when the Jew will encounter him, even if the Jew <b>entered the city and bathed,</b> the wine is <b>permitted,</b> because the gentile would not use the wine for a libation, for fear the owner might catch him at it. <b>If</b> the Jew <b>informed</b> the gentile <b>that he was going away</b> for a long period of time, the wine is forbidden if it was <b>sufficient</b> time <b>for</b> the gentile <b>to bore a hole</b> in the barrel, <b>seal</b> it again with plaster, <b>and</b> for the plaster to <b>dry. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says:</b> It is forbidden only if it was <b>sufficient</b> time <b>for him to open the barrel</b> by removing the stopper altogether, <b>stop</b> it again, <b>and</b> for the new stopper to <b>dry.</b> With regard to <b>one who left a gentile in</b> his <b>shop, even if</b> the Jew <b>went out and came in</b> and was not there all the time, the wine is <b>permitted. But if</b> the Jew <b>informed</b> the gentile <b>that he was going away</b> for a long period of time, the wine is forbidden if it was <b>sufficient</b> time <b>for</b> the gentile <b>to bore a hole</b> in the barrel, <b>seal</b> it again with plaster, <b>and</b> for the plaster to <b>dry. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says:</b> The wine is forbidden only if it was <b>sufficient</b> time <b>for</b> him <b>to open the barrel, stop</b> it again, <b>and</b> for the new stopper to <b>dry.</b>",
            "If a Jew <b>was eating with</b> a gentile <b>at the table, and left jugs [<i>laginin</i>]</b> of wine <b>on the table and a jug on the side table [<i>hadulebaki</i>], and he left it and went out, what is on the table</b> is <b>forbidden,</b> as it is likely that the gentile handled it, whereas <b>what is on the side table</b> is <b>permitted. But if</b> the Jew <b>said to</b> the gentile: <b>Mix</b> water with the wine <b>and drink, even</b> the jug <b>that is on the side table</b> is <b>forbidden.</b> Similarly, <b>open barrels are forbidden,</b> but <b>sealed</b> barrels <b>are permitted</b> unless the Jew was out of the room for <b>sufficient time for</b> the gentile <b>to open</b> the barrel by removing the stopper, <b>and stop</b> it again by making a new stopper, <b>and</b> for the new stopper to <b>dry.</b>",
            "In the case of <b>a military unit [<i>boleshet</i>] that entered a city,</b> if it entered <b>during peacetime,</b> then after the soldiers leave the <b>open barrels</b> of wine <b>are forbidden,</b> but the <b>sealed</b> barrels <b>are permitted.</b> If the unit entered <b>in wartime,</b> both <b>these</b> barrels <b>and those</b> barrels <b>are permitted, because</b> in wartime <b>there is no time to pour</b> wine for <b>libations,</b> and one can be certain that the soldiers did not do so.",
            "With regard to <b>Jewish craftsmen to whom a gentile sent a barrel of wine</b> used for <b>a libation in</b> lieu of <b>their wage,</b> it is <b>permitted</b> for them <b>to say</b> to him: <b>Give us its monetary value</b> instead. But <b>once it has entered into their possession,</b> it is <b>prohibited</b> for them to say so, as that would be tantamount to selling the wine to the gentile and deriving benefit from it. In the case of a Jew <b>who sells his wine to a gentile,</b> if <b>he fixed</b> a price <b>before he measured</b> the wine into the gentile’s vessel, deriving benefit from <b>the money</b> paid <b>for</b> the wine is <b>permitted.</b> It is not tantamount to selling wine used for a libation, as the gentile purchased the wine before it became forbidden, and the money already belonged to the Jew. But if the Jew <b>measured</b> the wine into the gentile’s vessel, thereby rendering it forbidden, <b>before he fixed</b> a price, <b>the money</b> paid <b>for</b> the wine is <b>forbidden.</b> In a case where a Jew <b>took a funnel and measured</b> wine <b>into a gentile’s jug, and then measured</b> wine with the same funnel <b>into a Jew’s jug, if there is a remnant of wine</b> left <b>in</b> the funnel, the wine measured into the Jew’s jug is <b>forbidden,</b> as some of the wine that was measured into the gentile’s jug is mixed in it. In the case of <b>one who pours</b> wine <b>from</b> one <b>vessel into</b> another <b>vessel,</b> the wine left in the vessel <b>from which he poured</b> is <b>permitted, but</b> the wine in the vessel <b>into which he poured</b> is <b>forbidden.</b>",
            " <b>Wine</b> used for <b>a libation</b> is <b>forbidden, and any amount</b> of it <b>renders</b> other wine <b>forbidden</b> if they are mixed together. <b>Wine</b> used for a libation that became mixed <b>with wine, or water</b> that was used for an idolatrous libation that became mixed <b>with</b> ordinary <b>water,</b> renders the mixture forbidden <b>with any amount</b> of the forbidden wine or water; but <b>wine</b> used for a libation that became mixed <b>with water, or water</b> used for a libation that became mixed <b>with wine</b> renders the mixture forbidden only if the forbidden liquid is sufficient <b>to impart flavor</b> to the mixture, i.e., for the wine to flavor the water or for the water to dilute the wine to an extent that can be tasted. <b>This is the principle: A substance</b> in contact <b>with</b> the <b>same</b> type of <b>substance</b> renders the mixture forbidden <b>with any amount</b> of the forbidden substance, <b>but</b> a substance in contact <b>with a different</b> type of <b>substance</b> renders the mixture forbidden only <b>in</b> a case where it <b>imparts flavor</b> to it. ",
            "<b>These</b> following items are themselves <b>forbidden, and any amount</b> of them <b>renders</b> other items with which they become mixed <b>forbidden: Wine</b> used for <b>a libation; and</b> objects of <b>idol worship; and hides</b> with a tear opposite the <b>heart,</b> indicating the idolatrous practice of sacrificing hearts of live animals. <b>And</b> this <i>halakha</i> also applies to <b>an ox that</b> has been condemned to be <b>stoned</b> (see Exodus 21:28), from which it is prohibited to derive benefit even before its sentence is carried out; <b>and</b> it applies to <b>a heifer whose neck is broken</b> when a person is found killed in an area between two cities and the murderer is unknown (see Deuteronomy 21:1–9), which is likewise forbidden from the time it is taken down to the river to be killed. In these cases, if the animal becomes mixed in a herd of similar animals, all of the animals in the herd are forbidden. <b>And</b> this <i>halakha</i> also applies to <b>birds</b> designated for the purification <b>of a leper</b> (Leviticus 14:1–6), <b>and the</b> shorn <b>hair of a nazirite</b> (Numbers 6:18), <b>and a firstborn donkey</b> (Exodus 13:13), <b>and meat</b> that was cooked <b>in milk</b> (Exodus 23:19), <b>and the scape-goat</b> of Yom Kippur (Leviticus 16:7–10), <b>and</b> the meat of <b>a non-sacred</b> animal <b>that was slaughtered in the</b> Temple <b>courtyard.</b> All of <b>these</b> are <b>forbidden</b> themselves, <b>and any amount</b> of them <b>renders</b> a mixture <b>forbidden.</b>",
            " In the case of <b>wine</b> used for <b>a libation that fell into</b> a wine <b>cistern,</b> it is <b>prohibited</b> to derive <b>benefit</b> from <b>all of</b> the wine in the cistern, even if the volume of the wine used for a libation was tiny in comparison to the volume of the wine in the cistern. <b>Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: All of the</b> wine in the cistern <b>may be sold to a gentile,</b> and the money paid for it is permitted <b>except for the value of the wine</b> used for <b>a libation</b> that is included <b>in it.</b>",
            "In the case of <b>a stone winepress that a gentile lined with pitch</b> and then poured wine onto the pitch to neutralize its flavor, <b>one may cleanse it and it is pure,</b> i.e., wine pressed in it is permitted. <b>And</b> if the winepress is fashioned <b>of wood, Rabbi</b> Yehuda HaNasi <b>says: One may cleanse it, but the Rabbis say: One must peel off the pitch</b> completely. <b>And</b> if the winepress is <b>of earthenware, even if one peeled off the pitch, this</b> press <b>is forbidden.</b>",
            "<b>One who purchases</b> cooking <b>utensils from the gentiles</b> must prepare them for use by Jews in the following manner: With regard to <b>those</b> utensils <b>whose manner</b> of preparation <b>is to immerse</b> them in a ritual bath, as they require no further preparation, <b>he must immerse</b> them accordingly. With regard to those utensils whose manner of preparation is <b>to purge</b> them with boiling water, as those utensils are used with boiling water, e.g., pots, <b>he must purge</b> them accordingly. With regard to those whose manner of preparation is <b>to heat until white-hot in the fire,</b> as they are used for grilling, <b>he must heat</b> them <b>until white-hot in the fire.</b> Therefore, with regard to <b>the spit [<i>hashappud</i>] and the grill [<i>veha’askela</i>], he must heat them until white-hot in the fire.</b> With regard to <b>the knife, he must polish it and it is</b> rendered <b>pure.</b>"
        ]
    ],
    "versions": [
        [
            "William Davidson Edition - English",
            "https://korenpub.com/collections/the-noe-edition-koren-talmud-bavli-1"
        ]
    ],
    "heTitle": "משנה עבודה זרה",
    "categories": [
        "Mishnah",
        "Seder Nezikin"
    ],
    "sectionNames": [
        "Chapter",
        "Mishnah"
    ]
}