(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem

Previous daf

Avodah Zarah 30



(a) We learned in a Beraisa that the boiled wine and Aluntis (a beverage containing wine) of a Nochri is forbidden, but that 'Aluntis ki'Beri'asah' is permitted. 'Aluntis ki'Beri'asah' means - Aluntis which the Nochri purchased from a Yisrael, which is permitted - because it was never wine in the possession of a Nochri to begin with.

(b) Another Beraisa forbids making Aluntis on Shabbos, but permits Anumlin, which consists of wine, honey and peppers. Aluntis comprises - old wine, clear water and Afarsemon (balsam) oil.

(c) The basic difference between them is - that whereas Anumlin is made to drink, Aluntis is made to help cool down after a hot bath (and which therefore falls under the category of a cure).

(a) Wine that has been left uncovered is forbidden to drink - because we are afraid that a snake drank from it, leaving its venom inside whatever remains.

(b) Rabah and Rav Yosef preclude ...

1. ... diluted wine - from the above suspicion.
2. ... boiled wine - from the Din of Yayin Nesech.
(c) In answer to our She'eilah whether boiled wine is also permitted if left uncovered, we cite a statement of Ya'akov bar Idi - who specifically precluded it.

(d) When the Rabbanan, who were visiting the sick Rebbi Yanai bar Yishmael together with Rebbi Yishmael ben Zirud, asked the same She'eilah, the latter cited Resh Lakish quoting Rebbi Chiya - who permitted it, too.

(a) When the Rabbanan (surprised at this ruling) asked whether they could rely on it, Rebbi Yanai bar Yishmael replied - that he personally, could vouch for its authenticity.

(b) Shmuel and Avalat the Nochri were once sitting together when someone brought them boiled wine to drink. When Avalat made a point of not touching the wine - Shmuel told him that this was not necessary, since the Chachamim had permitted boiled wine that was touched by a Nochri.

(a) We previously cited Rebbi Chiya with regard to the She'eilah of boiled wine that was left uncovered. When his maidservant asked him whether some wine that she had left uncovered was permitted or not, he replied - that it was.

(b) When the Shamash of Rav Ada bar Ahavah left some diluted wine uncovered, Rav Papa - forbade it since it was only slightly diluted (and the Chachamim only permitted if it was diluted properly [three parts water to one part wine]).

(c) When Rabah bar Rav Huna spied a snake swimming towards the boat in which he was transporting wine, he instructed his servant to 'blind the eyes' of the snake. The servant complied - by adding a bit of water to the wine.

(d) Rav Papa reconciled his previous ruling with this episode - establishing that, although a snake will drink wine that is slightly diluted, it will not take the risk of doing so when there are people who are actually watching (something it will do when the wine is undiluted).

(a) Rebbi Yanai (or bar Hedya) was once sitting in bei Achburi drinking diluted wine, when a snake was seen approaching the half-empty barrel - which they had covered with a cloth as a precaution against a snake drinking from the barrel.

(b) The snake however - proceeded to fill the barrel with water until it reached the top and then to drink it from the saturated cloth.

(c) In spite of the fact that the wine was diluted, we reconcile our earlier ruling precluding diluted wine from Yayin Megulin with this episode - by differentiating between wine that was diluted by a person and wine that the snake diluted itself.

(d) Rav Ashi (or Rav Mesharshaya) objected to this answer - on the grounds that when it comes to Sakanah (as opposed to Halachah), it is better to be strict than to look for answers (in which case we ought to include diluted wine in the category of Yayin Megulin).

(a) So Rava finally concludes - that cooked wine is precluded from Yayin Megulin, but diluted wine is not ...

(b) ... and the same applies to Yayin Nesech.

(a) When Rebbi Chilkiyah bar Tuvi's Shamash fell asleep beside an open barrel of water - he ruled that snakes are afraid of people even when they are asleep - by day, but not at night.

(b) The Halachah in this regard is - that snakes are afraid of people who are awake, but not of those who are asleep (even by day).

(c) The reasoning of ...

1. ...Rav, who would not drink water that came from Nochrim, but who would drink water that came from an Almanah is - that Nochrim are not conversant with the concept of Mayim Megulin, whereas a widow will do what she saw her husband doing whilst he was alive.
2. ... Shmuel, who would practice the reverse is - that whereas, on the one hand, neither is conversant with the concept of Giluy, Nochrim are at least particular about cleanliness (in which case they will not leave water uncovered).
(d) In the second Lashon, Rav did just like he did in the first - whereas Shmuel would drink neither water from a widow, nor water from a Nochri.
(a) Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi lists three wines that are not subject to Giluy - 'Chad, Mar and Masok' (sharp, bitter and sweet).

(b) 'Chad' is a sharp wine which does not have a sweet, winey venom - and which causes the flask in which it is placed to crack.

(c) 'Mar' is a bad, bitter tasting wine. 'Masuk' is also know as 'Chulya', which turns so sweet - because of the effect of the sun on it.

(d) Rav Chama interprets all three favorably. According to him, 'Mar' venoms like (venomous) wormwood, 'Masuk' like a pleasant tasting wine - and 'Chad' has a sharp venom due to the peppers and spices that are added to it.

(e) According to Resh Lakish, a sweet wine called 'Karina' is not subject to Giluy. In its own country says Rava, it is - because the snakes have gotten used to it.




(a) According to Rava, wine that has turned sour, is still subject to both Giluy and Yayin Nesech - for another three days.

(b) The Neherda'i argue with Rava with regard to Giluy. According to them - a snake will continue to drink from it for longer.

(c) Wine fresh from the vat is not subject to Giluy - for the first three days.

(d) Basically, cress is not subject to Giluy either. But the Beraisa cites the B'nei Golah - who forbade it.

(e) Even the B'nei Golah however, will concede that cress is not subject to Giluy - if it contains vinegar (with which the snakes palate does not agree).

(a) Likewise, Kutach ha'Bavli (a mixture of moldy bread, whey and salt) is not subject to Giluy, though the B'nei Golah are strict. Rav Menashi states - that if the mark of a snakes fangs are visible on it, then even the B'nei Eretz Yisrael will concede that it is forbidden.

(b) Rav Chiya bar Ashi Amar Shmuel precludes 'Mei Tif-Tif' from Giluy. Rav Ashi interprets 'Mei Tif-Tif' - as drops that follow each other in quick succession (a noise which frightens the snakes away).

(c) Rav Chiya bar Ashi Amar Shmuel precludes the 'mouth of a fig' - the tip of the stalk where it was originally attached to the tree.

(d) We establish this like Rebbi Eliezer, who, in a Beraisa, permits eating grapes and figs at night-time, because the Pasuk in Tehilim writes "Shomer Pesayim Hashem" (meaning that Hashem guards the fools [who behave conventionally] see Seifer 'Seider Ya'akov').

(a) Rav Safra in the name of Rebbi Yehoshua from Rome, lists three kinds of venom. The venom of a young snake, he says - shoots to the bottom of whatever it drinks, that of a middle-age snake - penetrates to the middle, whereas that of and an old snake - floats at the top.

(b) The Beraisa lists a fish, a snake and a pig - as the three species that gain strength as they get older.

(c) We reconcile this with Rav Safra, according to whom it seems, the older a snake gets, the weaker it becomes (like other species) - by confining his statement to the snake's venom, whereas the Beraisa is speaking about the general strength of the three animals concerned.

(d) The ramifications of Rav Safra's statement are presented in a Beraisa - which warns the tenth person not to drink from a jar or eat from a watermelon, after nine people have already partaken from it (And what's more, such a case actually took place, and the tenth person did indeed die.

(a) Neither however, should ...
1. ... the first person have drunk from the jar or eaten from the watermelon - in case an old snake partook of it.
2. ... the middle ones have drunk or eaten either - in case it was a middle-age snake.
(b) Besides pouring Mayim she'Nisgalu into the street, sprinkling it around the house or using it for mixing cement - the Beraisa also forbids feeding an animal with it or washing one's face, hands and feet.

(c) One may not pour it in the street - in case someone walks past bear-footed, and the venom lodges between his toes and punctures an opening in his skin.

(a) Acherim (Rebbi Meir) restricts the prohibition of washing oneself with Mayim Megulin to parts of the body which has cracks and splits. The problem with this ruling is - that it seems to concur with the Tana Kama, who forbids washing hands, face and feet (all of which have cracks n the skin) with Mayim Megulin,

(b) To clarify their Machlokes - we confine Acherim to the front of the hands and the feet, and most of the face, precluding the back of the hands, the back of the feet and the cheekbones, which are smooth, which he therefore permits.

(c) We reconcile the current Beraisa, which forbids feeding even one's own animal 'Mayim Megulin' with another Beraisa, which permits it - by establishing the latter Beraisa with regard to a cat, who is immune to a snake-bite.

(d) The second Tana nevertheless forbids giving Mayim Megulin to somebody else's cat more than to one's own - because, even though the venom will not kill the cat, it will weaken him momentarilyshould he attempt to sell it at that moment.

Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,