Jewish audio on Chabad.org. Today's שיעור is going to be מסכת עבודה זרה דף נ"ה, but we will start on דף נ"ד עמוד ב' in middle of the עמוד from the beginning of the משנה. And the משנה says: שאלו את הזקנים ברומי, they asked the זקנים in רומי, אם אין רצונו בעבודה זרה, if His will is not in עבודה זרה, if השם doesn't want עבודה זרה, למה אינו מבטלה? Why doesn't He nullify it, why doesn't He destroy עבודה זרה? אמרו להם, so they said to them, so the זקנים answered those that asked this question: אילו לדבר שאין צורך לעולם בו היו עובדים, if they would be worshipping something that there is no need to the world, the world doesn't need that, היה מבטלו, he would have destroyed it, but הרי הן עובדים לחמה וללבנה ולכוכבים ולמזלות, but they worship the sun and the moon and the stars and the constellations, and these are things that are needed for the world, יאבד עולמו מפני השוטים? So he should destroy his world because of these fools? In other words, these are things that the world needs, so because they worship it, he should destroy it? אמרו להם, so they said to them, אם כן, if so, the whole reason why he doesn't destroy it is because the world needs it, יאבד דבר שאין צורך לעולם בו, let him destroy those things that the world doesn't have a need in it, ויניח דבר שצורך לעולם בו, and let him leave those things that the world does need. So there are certain עבודה זרות that the world doesn't need, let him destroy that. If the whole reason he doesn't destroy it is because the world needs it, so if the world doesn't need it, he should destroy it. אמרו להם, so they said to them, אף אנו מחזיקים ידי עובדיהם של אלו, if this would happen, then we would be strengthening the hands of those that worship those עבודה זרות, שאומרים, they would say, תדעו, you should know, שהן אלוהות, that they are gods, שהרי הן לא בטלו, after all, they didn't become בטל. If השם would destroy some and not destroy the others, it means those that the world needs he wouldn't destroy, but those that the world doesn't need he would destroy. So the people who worship those things that the world does need that wasn't destroyed, they would say the reason it wasn't destroyed is because it's a god. So ממילא, this would strengthen the worshippers of those עבודה זרות, and that is the reason השם doesn't destroy that either. And even though one might ask, on what basis would they say that? After all, there was a very good reason why השם didn't destroy it. It is because the world needs it. So how could they say that the reason השם didn't destroy it is because they are gods? So the מהרש"א answers that these people would not accept this explanation that the reason he didn't destroy it is because the world needs it. They would claim the reason it wasn't destroyed is because השם can't destroy it. And not only would this not prove that this is not an עבודה זרה, on the contrary, they would say that this is a proof that this is עבודה זרה. And therefore, because they could say that and make that mistake, השם doesn't destroy any עבודה זרה. The גמרא says: תנו רבנן, and the רבנן learned: שאלו, so the philosophers asked the question, the זקנים in Rome, אלהיכם אם אין רצונו בעבודה זרה, if your God doesn't want עבודה זרה, מפני מה אינו מבטלה? Why doesn't He nullify it, why doesn't He destroy it? אמרו להם, so they said to them: אילו לדבר שאין העולם צורך לו היו עובדים, if they would worship something that the world does not need, הרי הוא מבטלו, he would have destroyed it, but הרי הן עובדים לחמה וללבנה ולכוכבים ולמזלות, but they worship the sun, the moon, the stars, and the constellations, and these are things that the world needs, יאבד עולמו מפני השוטים? So he should destroy the world because of these fools? אלא עולם כמנהגו נוהג, the world continues going in its own way, its own custom, ושוטים שקלקלו, and these fools that spoiled, that did the עבירה, עתידין ליתן את הדין, they will eventually have to pay, they will have to stand judgment for what they did.

דבר אחר, another פשט or another way of explaining it, הרי שגזל סאה של חטים והלך וזרעה בקרקע, when a person stole a סאה of wheat and went and planted it in the ground, דין הוא שלא תצמח, so really what should happen, it shouldn't grow, because he had no right to plant it because after all it's not his, so השם should really make it that it shouldn't grow, אלא עולם כמנהגו נוהג, the world continues in its own מנהג. The מנהג of the world, the טבע of the world, the nature is that when you plant, it grows. So even though this was stolen, if you planted it, it'll grow, ושוטים שקלקלו עתידין ליתן את הדין, and these fools that spoiled, that did the עבירה, they will be punished later on. But because they did the עבירה, that is not a reason that השם should change the nature of the world. דבר אחר, another פשט, which means another example to this is, הרי שבא על אשת חבירו, someone had relations with the wife of his friend, דין הוא שלא תתעבר, really it should happen she should not become pregnant because he had no right to do it, אלא עולם כמנהגו נוהג, the world continues in its own nature, ושוטים שקלקלו, עתידין ליתן עתידין ליתן את הדין, that these fools that did the עבירה, they will be punished later on. והיינו דאמר

ריש לקיש, this is what ריש לקיש said, אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא, השם said, לא דיין לרשעים, it's not enough for the רשעים, שעושין סלע שלי פומבי, that they make my coin הפקר. And here the coin represents the human being. And השם says that they make my coin הפקר, that they make a human being הפקר, that people are able to have relations with an ערוה, with a woman that is forbidden, and not only that, אלא שמטריחין אותי, but they also make me go through the trouble, ומחתימין אותי בעל כורחי, and they make me seal it against my will. Because השם created the world that the nature is that a woman does get pregnant, and who's the one that creates the human being? השם. So the person who has relations with a forbidden woman, he causes השם against השם's will to make the woman conceive and give birth to a child. So this fits to the משל that he gave before that really what should happen, she should not conceive under such a situation. But השם doesn't change the course of nature, therefore he makes her conceive anyway. But השם complains that it's not enough that they make my סלע הפקר, but in addition to that he caused me to seal against my will this coin. And as רש"י explains, the custom used to be that all the kings used to have coins in their country with their picture on it. So the human being is like a coin of השם, because it says in פסוקים, בצלם אלוקים עשה את האדם, because the אייבישטער created the person with בצלם, with the image of השם. So therefore we are like a coin with the image of השם. So when a person does an עבירה in such a case, he makes the coin הפקר, and not only that, he causes השם to create another another human being with that same image against the will of השם. And רש"י says that when the גמרא here quotes from ריש לקיש, it doesn't say for which פסוק ריש לקיש דארשנ'ס it. In other words, how does ריש לקיש know that this is what השם says? Usually it's דארשנ'ד from a פסוק, so therefore we're able to say השם says it because this is what the פסוק indicates. But in this case it doesn't quote a פסוק. The תוספות says, in חומש, ער דרשנ'ט עס from the פסוק כי ילוד חוטאת. Then the גמרא continues,

שאל פילוסופא אחד את רבן גמליאל, a philosopher asked רבן גמליאל, כתיב בתורתכם, it says in your תורה, ה' אלוקיך אש אוכלה הוא קל קנא, that השם is like a burning fire, he is a God of jealousy. מפני מה הוא מתקנא בעובדיה ואין מתקנא בה, why is he jealous and takes revenge in its worshippers, in those that worship עבודה זרה, and he doesn't take revenge in עבודה זרה itself? אמר לו, רבן גמליאל said to him, אמשול לך משל, I will give you an example, I give you a parable, a משל. למה הדבר דומה, this is similar למלך בשר ודם, for a king, a human being, a king, שהיה לו בן אחד, he had one son, ואותו הבן היה מגדל לו כלב, and this son raised a dog, והעלה לו שם על שם אביו, and he gave the dog the name of his father, וכשהוא נשבע, when he used to swear, אומר, he used to say, בחיי כלב אבא, I swear in the life of my dog the father. So this is an insult to the king that he is saying the dog is his father. כששמע המלך, when the king heard this, על מי הוא כועס, on whom is he angry? על הבן הוא כועס או על הכלב הוא כועס, and whom would he be angry, on the son or on the dog? הוי אומר, won't you say, על הבן הוא כועס, he is angry at the son. And the same thing here, whom should השם be angry? At עבודה זרה itself or those that worship עבודה זרה, those that claim that עבודה זרה is God? אמר לו, so the philosopher said to him, כלב אתה קורא אותו, and you call it a dog? והלא יש בה ממש, but after all it has some meaning, there is truth in עבודה זרה. So how could you say it's only like a dog? אמר לו, so he said to him, מה ראית, so what did you see? On what basis do you say that עבודה זרה has some ממש? אמר לו, so he said to him, פעם אחת נפלה דליקה בעירנו, at one time a fire caught our city, ונשרפה כל העיר כולה, and the whole city was burned, ואותו בית עבודת כוכבים לא נשרף, and that house of עבודה זרה was not burned. So doesn't that show that there is a ממש in עבודה זרה? אמר לו, so he said to him, אמשול לך משל, I will give you a משל for that too. למה הדבר דומה, this is similar למלך בשר ודם, to a human being, a king, שסרחה עליו מדינה, and a certain city sinned against him. כשהוא עושה מלחמה, and when he's going to make a war, wage war against the people who sinned, עם החיים הוא עושה או עם המתים הוא עושה, with whom is he going to fight? With the live ones or with the people who died already? הוי אומר, won't you say, עם החיים הוא עושה, he'll do it with the live ones. The same thing here also. When השם burned the city down, he only burned the other parts of the city, but not the עבודה זרה of the city. Because עבודה זרה is compared to a dead person, so there is no use destroying the dead person, just like in this משל that when the king will have the war, he'll have it only with the חיים not with the מתים. אמר לו, so he said to him, כלב אתה קורא אותו, so you call it a dog? מת אתה קורא אותו, you call it a מת? אם כן, יאבדנו מן העולם, then destroy it from the world. If it's only like a dog and like a dead body, so why does he keep it? Why doesn't he destroy it from the world? אמר ליה, so he said to him, אילו לדבר שאין העולם צריך לו היו עובדין, if they would be worshipping only something the world doesn't need, הרי הוא מבטלו, he would have destroyed it. But הרי הן עובדין לחמה וללבנה ולכוכבים ולמזלות, but they worship the sun, the moon, the stars, and the constellations, ולאפיקים ולגבעות, and to the brooks and to the valleys, יאבד עולמו מפני שוטים, so he should destroy the world because of these fools? And that is the reason he doesn't destroy the עבודה זרה. But the מהרשא asks the question here that before that, what did this philosopher ask רבן גמליאל? After all, he told him already that that person, the king, does not make a מלחמה with the מתים. So why did he ask him again, אם כן יאבדם מן העולם? He said to him, you call it a כלב and you call it a מת, if so, why doesn't he destroy it from the world? He just told him the answer, as he said before: Since it is a מת and there is no use in having a war with a מת, and that is the reason he doesn't destroy it. But the מהרשא answers, באמת, the philosopher himself understood this סברא that something that the world needs, ה' would not destroy. But he says to him, since you call it כלב and you call it מת, obviously these are things that have no use, because if they would have use, you couldn't call it כלב or מת. So obviously it has no use. Now, if it has no use, I have a question: Why doesn't he destroy it? And the answer was that they worship things that have a use. So even though it is considered a מת, that is only concerning the fact that they want to make it into עבודה זרה. As an עבודה זרה, it is a מת. But לפועל, the world has a use of it, and therefore, he doesn't destroy it. וכן הוא אומר, and also a פסוק that says, and this is a פסוק in צפניה. First the previous פסוק says: אסף אסף כל מעל פני האדמה נאום ה', ה' is saying: Should I destroy everything from the face of the earth? אסף אדם ובהמה, shall I destroy man and בהמה? אסף עוף השמים ודגי הים, shall I destroy the birds from the heaven and the fish of the rivers, of the oceans, והמכשלות את הרשעים וגו', and the stumbling blocks of the רשעים? So the פסוק is saying that וכי מפני שהרשעים נכשלין בהן, is it because that the רשעים stumble over it, יאבדם מן העולם, I should destroy it from the world? And it goes on even more: והלא לאדם הם עובדין, don't they worship a human being also? And the פסוק continues: והכרתי את האדם מעל פני האדמה וגו', the end of the פסוק is נאום ה', which means: Should I destroy the human being from the face of the earth because they are going and worshiping? You can't do that. So the פסוק is telling us that since these are things that the world needs, ה' does not destroy it. Then the גמרא continues:

שאל אגריפס שר צבא את רבן גמליאל. אגריפס, who was the general of the army, asked רבן גמליאל. And רש"י says that he was a גוי, and he was appointed as general of the army, and he was at the time of אגריפס המלך, and he asked רבן גמליאל this question. He said to him, כתיב באורייתא, so he says in your תורה: ה' אלקיך אש אוכלה הוא, ה' is like a burning fire, קל קנא, he is a jealous God. His question was: כלום מתקנא אלא חכם בחכם וגבור בגבור ועשיר בעשיר? A חכם is jealous of another חכם. A גבור, a strong person, is jealous of another גבור. A rich man is jealous of another rich man. But if the other person is not on his level, he's not jealous of him. So in this case, why is ה' jealous of the עבודה זרה? אמר ליה, so he said to him: אמשול לך משל. I will give you a משל, למה הדבר דומה, what this is similar to: לאדם שנשא אשה על אשתו, to a man marries a second wife in addition to his first wife. חשובה הימנה, if the second one is more important than the first, is greater than the first, אין מתקנא בה, so the first wife doesn't mind, she doesn't hate the second wife, she's not jealous of the second wife. פחותה הימנה, but if the second one is lower, less than the first wife, מתקנא בה, then she is jealous of him. And the same thing here: You ask the question why is ה' jealous of the עבודה זרה, after all, the עבודה זרה is nothing. So he gave him the משל that because the עבודה זרה is nothing, because it is lower, that's why ה' is jealous of it. But the מהרשא asks the question: What kind of answer did he give him? For the same קשיא he asked him is on the משל itself. In the משל where the man married a second wife, why should the second wife be angry if the first one is lower? Can't you ask the same question: כלום מתקנא אלא חכם בחכם, גבור בגבור, עשיר בעשיר? So if the second wife is lower than the first, so the first should not be jealous, because there's no reason to be jealous in something and in somebody that is lower than you. And therefore, the מהרשא explains it as follows. He says that we all know that the term קנאה has two meanings. קנאה could mean jealousy, like we have by a human being, that a person is jealous of somebody else who has more than him. קנאה also could come from the לשון of anger, like it says ה' דקא מקני, that means ה' gets angry. And what is the difference, he says, between the question that אגריפס here asked and the question that the גמרא says before that a philosopher asked רבן גמליאל, because earlier in the גמרא it said that a philosopher asked רבן גמליאל, and he quoted the same פסוק where it says קל קנא, and he said, מפני מה מתקנא בעובדיה ואינו מתקנא בה? Why is השם מתקנא in those that worship עבודה זרה, and he's not מתקנא in it? That philosopher understood the פשט, that when it says קל קנא concerning השם, it doesn't mean השם is jealous, it means השם gets angry. And therefore he understood that there is a reason for השם to get angry at עבודה זרה, because עבודה זרה is the thing that causes the people to do the עבירה. So therefore he asked him, why does he get angry at the people and not at עבודה זרה? And he couldn't answer him, the reason he doesn't get angry at עבודה זרה is because אין מתקנא חכם בחכם גיבור בגיבור עשיר בעשיר, because that doesn't answer the question. That is only answer, would only answer if the פשט would be he is jealous, then you could say he doesn't get jealous of עבודה זרה because עבודה זרה is nothing. But this philosopher who asked רבן גמליאל the question understood that the word קל קנא really means he gets angry, he takes revenge. So that's why he asked, why does he take revenge on the people that worship, but not in עבודה זרה itself? But אגריפס, who asked רבן גמליאל the question, he thought that when the פסוק says קל קנא, it means jealousy like we use by a human being. And that's why he asked the question, how could השם be jealous of עבודה זרה, when we know that only a חכם בחכם, a גיבור בגיבור, an עשיר בעשיר gets jealous? And what רבן גמליאל answered him was that this לשון, קל קנא, doesn't mean jealousy, but it means anger. And that's the משל he gave him, that the second wife is angry at her husband for marrying a person, you know, for marrying somebody that is lower than her. So she's not jealous of her because you're not jealous of somebody that is lower, but to get angry, and in the case where you're able to take revenge, you take revenge, that is possible. And that's what he said, he gave him the משל that if the husband marries a wife which is more חשוב than the first wife, then the first wife will not get angry at her husband. But if he marries a lower wife, she gets angry at her husband and will try to take revenge. And the same thing with השם, since the people worship an עבודה זרה, so השם is angry at the people why they chose עבודה זרה instead of him, because עבודה זרה is lower than him and because עבודה זרה is nothing. Then the גמרא continues, אמר ליה זונין לרבי עקיבא, זונין said to רבי עקיבא, Rashi says זונין was a איד, said to him, ליבי וליבך ידע דעבודה זרה לית בה מששא, my heart and your heart knows that עבודה זרה has no ממשות, has nothing. There's no meaning to it. But look, חזינן גברי דאזלי, we see people that go כי מיתברי, when they're broken, meaning that they are sick, ואתו כי מיתרצי, and they come out of there when they are fixed. We see people who are sick and they go in to worship עבודה זרה, and they come out and they are cured, so it seems as if the עבודה זרה cures them. מאי טעמא? What is the reason for that? How does that happen? אמר ליה, so he said to him, אמשול לך משל, I'll give you a משל, למה הדבר דומה, what this is similar to. לאדם נאמן שהיה בעיר, there was a trustworthy person in the city, וכל בני עירו היו מפקידין אצלו שלא בעדים, and all the people of the city used to keep him, give him things to watch for them without witnesses, because they trusted him. ובא אדם אחד והפקיד לו בעדים, and one person used to give him things to hide with witnesses. פעם אחת שכח והפקיד אצלו שלא בעדים, once he forgot and he gave him something to watch without witnesses. אמרה לו אשתו, wife said to him, בוא ונכפרנו, let's go and deny it. Let's deny that that person gave us the object to watch, because everyone will believe you that you're right, because after all, always he used to bring witnesses, and now that he didn't, so you're able to deny it. אמר לה, so he said to her, וכי מפני ששוטה זה עשה שלא כהוגן, is it because this fool did not the way he should, didn't do it properly, אנו נאבד את נאמנותנו, so we should lose our trust? Because of that we should deny it? אף כך, so too, concerning this case here. ייסורין, בשעה שמשגרין אותן על האדם, when the ייסורין, the pain, the suffering is sent upon a person, משביעין אותן, they make it swear, שלא תלכו, תלכו אלא ביום פלוני, they should only go on a certain day, they should come to the person on a certain day, ולא תצאו אלא ביום פלוני ובשעה פלונית, and they should not leave that person only on a certain day and a certain hour, ועל ידי פלוני, and through this specific doctor, ועל ידי סם פלוני, and through this specific medicine. כיוון שהגיע זמנן לצאת, and the

time for the ייסורין comes to leave the person, happened that הלך לו לבית עבודה זרה, he happened to go to the house of עבודה זרה. אמרו ייסורין, so the ייסורין say, דין הוא שלא נצא, the truth is we should not leave this person now, even though now is the time that we swore we would leave, but by us leaving, he will claim that עבודה זרה is the one that cured him. So really we should not leave, that it shouldn't bring you to this mistake. וחזרו ואמרו, but then they change and say, וכי מפני ששוטה זה עשה שלא כהוגן, is it because this person did it improperly, אנו lose our שבועה, so we should lose our שבועה? If we promised to leave the person at this time, we have to leave the person at this time. איי, this will cause that he will see or think that this עבודה זרה that cured him, so that's his problem, so to speak. But because he is a fool and he will think so, we should not keep our שבועה? It's similar to the משל he gave, that because he is a fool and hid the object by us without עדים, that's why we should do something against our נאמנות? We can't do it. And the same thing here also. In other words, the answer he gave him was that the reason that the person goes out in the בית עבודה זרה and is cured is not because עבודה זרה cured him, it is because just then the time came for the ייסורים to leave him. איי, he happened to be by עבודה זרה, this is not a reason why the ייסורים should not leave him at that time. והיינו דאמר רבי יוחנן, and this is what רבי יוחנן said, מאי דכתיב, what does it mean what the פסוק has it said, וחלים רעים ונאמנים, השם says He will send them sicknesses, bad sicknesses, and ones that are trusted? What does that mean? רעים בשליחותן, they are bad in their mission, because their mission is to do harm to the person, to make the person sick, but ונאמנים בשבועתן, but they are trustworthy in their שבועה, that they leave the person the time they promised to leave, even though there was a reason that they should not leave at that time. And the גמרא continues, אמר ליה רבא בר רב יצחק לרב יהודה, רבא בר רב יצחק said to רב יהודה, האיכא בית עבודת כוכבים באתרין, there is this house of עבודה זרה in our city, דכי מצטריך עלמא למטרא, and when the world needs rain, מיתחזי להו בחלמא, so this עבודה זרה appears to them, obviously to the ones that worshipped עבודה זרה, in a dream, ואמר להו, and says to them, שחטו לי גברא, שחט, slaughter a person to me, ואייתי מטרא, and rain will come, שחטו ליה גברא, so they שחט a person to עבודה זרה, ואתי מטרא, and rain comes. How could this happen? אמר ליה, so he said to him, השתא, now, אי הוי שכיבנא, if I would have not been alive, לא אמרי לכו הא מילתא, I couldn't have said to you this thing. In other words, you're lucky I'm here, so I'm able to bring you a saying of רב, and this will answer your question.

דאמר רב, because רב said, מאי דכתיב, what is the meaning of the פסוק, when השם speaks about those people who worship the sun and the stars, etc., says that a איד should not worship it, but אשר חלק ה׳ אלקיך אותם, that השם separated them לכל העמים, to all the nations. מלמד, that teaches us, שהחליקן בדברים, that He made them smooth with words, כדי לטורדן מן העולם, in order to destroy them from the world. In other words, when the פסוק says that השם separated the sun and the stars, etc., for all the nations, you can't say it simply means He separated them, in other words, He set it aside for the nations to worship it. Because as the מהרש״א explains, this would mean that השם gave the גוים permission to worship עבודה זרה, and we know that even גוים are forbidden to worship עבודה זרה. Also to say, as רש״י says in חומש, that השם separated it into the whole world to shine, for instance, talking about the sun, so השם set aside the sun for the world to shine, that's also hard to say, because He separated to all the nations and not for the אידן? As if the אידן are not allowed to have the shine of the sun? So therefore he says, what does the פסוק mean חלק? It comes from the word חלק, smooth, that He made the words of the גוים smooth, so they should have some kind of proof for the ממשות of their עבודה זרה, so they will worship the עבודה זרה, and השם will have a reason to destroy them from the world. So טייטש חלק from the word החליקם בדברים, He made their words smooth, so they should have some kind of reason to worship עבודה זרה. And that was the answer he gave to this. You ask how come it is so that when they listened to the עבודה זרה and they שחט a person, rain came, השם makes it special so they should think that the עבודה זרה has some ממשות, so they will worship it, and then השם will have a reason to destroy them from the world. והיינו דאמר ריש לקיש, this is what

ריש לקיש said, מאי דכתיב, what what is the meaning of the פסוק that is said, אם ללצים הוא יליץ ולענוים יתן חן, that He scorns the scorners, and to the ענוים, the humble, He shows grace, He gives grace, it means like this: בא לטמא, פותחין לו, if someone comes to become טמא, he wants to do something wrong, they open for him. השם doesn't stop him from doing wrong, He opens the door for him, let him do what he wants. בא לטהר, if someone comes to become clean, someone comes to do something good, מסייעין אותו, they help him. And this is what the פסוק says: If he wants to be a לץ, השם הוא יליץ, He's with him, He'll let him do it. לענוים, if he wants to be a ענו, if he wants to be good, ולענוים יתן חן, השם will give him grace. And the same is concerning עבודה זרה. These people who want to worship עבודה זרה, so השם makes so that it should be possible for them, they should think that עבודה זרה is good in order for them to worship it, and then השם will be able to destroy them. And it's interesting that we see that when it comes to the טמא, someone wants to become טמא, do something bad, פותחין לו, they open for him, and if someone wants to be טהור, they don't only open it for him and allow him to do it, but מסייעין אותו, השם also helps him, which is more than when it comes to טמא, because when it comes to do something good, השם will do more than To the person who wants to do something bad. And also, considering the words בא לטהר, מסייעין אותו, there is a פשט that when a person wants to become clean, it should say בא ליטהר, not לטהר. לטהר means to make clean, ליטהר means to become clean. So, really you could read it בא ליטהר, but it doesn't have a יוד, so you could read it also בא לטהר. And what he is saying here, בא לטהר, if someone comes to make someone else טהור, if someone comes to work with someone else and try to help someone else become טהור, try to help someone else to go on the right path, and be לטהר, מסייעין אותו, they help this person מן השמים. And now we

will start with the משנה. משנה says: לוקחין גת בעוטה מן העובד כוכבים, you are allowed to buy from a גוי a winepress that contains trodden grapes, אף על פי שהוא נוטל בידו ונותן לתוך התפוח, even though the גוי takes the grapes with his hand and puts it on top of the pile. The custom, the way it used to be was, that when they used to squeeze grapes to make it wine, they would have an area where they would put the grapes in, into the press, and they would press the grapes, the wine would come out, and from there it would roll down on a slanty area into the place that was called the בור. The בור was a hole, a pit in the ground, and there used to be two ways: or in that pit in the ground they would have a big כלי, a big vat, and the juice would go into that vat; or the hole itself was the vat, they would seal the hole with plaster, and that would keep the wine from seeping into the ground, and that hole would be the storage place for the wine. But in the winepress itself, after they pressed it, then, with the hand, they would gather all the grapes that were pressed into the middle, and make a pile out of it. So the משנה is saying here that you're allowed to buy a winepress with the pressed grapes in it from a גוי, even though he pressed the grapes, so it comes out that juice came out from it, so it was wine. Now, we assume that the גוי, with his hand, took some of the grapes from the side, and pushed it into the pile, and since these grapes were already pressed, the juice came out of it, so it was wine, so it comes out that these grapes were layed in wine that was touched by a גוי. Nevertheless, the משנה says that you're allowed to buy this winepress with these pressed grapes inside from a גוי, and we don't mind the fact that the גוי picked it up with his hand, some of the wine, and put it on to the pile. And the reason is, because the wine that's in the press, before it goes down to the בור, is not considered wine, and therefore, by the גוי touching it, doesn't make it יין נסך. And the משנה continues: ואינו עושה יין נסך עד שירד לבור, and he doesn't make it יין נסך until the juice, the wine goes into the בור. ירד לבור, after it goes into the בור, then, if the גוי touched the wine that's in the בור, מה שבבור אסור, the wine that's in the בור is אסור, והשאר, and the rest that didn't go into the בור, מותר, is מותר. Now in this last expression of the משנה: ואינו עושה יין נסך עד שירד לבור, there are many גירסאות. As תוספות brings, there is one גירסא that it says: שאינו עושה יין נסך עד שירד לבור. Which would mean that this is the reason for the beginning of the משנה. The משנה says that you're allowed to buy the גת בעוטה, the winepress with the grapes inside from the גוי, even though the גוי picked it up with his hands and put it onto the תפוח, onto the pile. But the reason for that is, why are you allowed? The משנה says: שאינו עושה יין נסך, because a גוי will not turn it into יין נסך until the wine goes into the בור. But the wine that's in the press is not considered wine, and therefore it's not יין נסך. Another גירסא is that it is without a שין, that the משנה just says: אינו עושה יין נסך עד שירד לבור, it's another דין. The fact is that a גוי does not turn wine to יין נסך until the wine is in the בור. This is not written in the משנה as a reason for the beginning of the משנה. So the משנה would be saying you're allowed to buy the winepress with the pressed grapes from a גוי even though he takes it with his hands, and then the משנה says another דין: a גוי does not turn the wine into יין נסך until it goes into the בור. Then there's a third גירסא, the way we have it, that it says with a וו: ואינו עושה יין נסך עד שירד לבור. So the משנה, according to this גירסא, is telling us another דין, in addition to the דין that you're allowed to buy this גת בעוטה from a גוי because even though he picks up the grapes we don't mind, there's another דין also, that he will not turn the wine into יין נסך until it goes into the בור. So it comes out that this second part of the משנה will tell us a new דין: there's another דין also, that he will not turn the wine into יין נסך until it goes into the בור. So it comes out that this second part of the משנה will tell us a new דין: that not only the wine that's in the press does not become יין נסך, but also the wine in the קילוח, the wine that's flowing down into the בור, as long as it didn't reach into the בור, the wine is not יין נסך. That's what it says, it doesn't become יין נסך until it gets into the בור, but the place where it's flowing down, even though it already left the press and it's coming down to the בור, that area if the גוי touches it, is still not יין נסך. But then תוספות asks a קשיא, so why does the משנה have to tell us in the רישא, in the beginning of the משנה, that you're allowed to buy the pressed grapes from the גוי, even though the גוי touched it while they were in the press, if the משנה later on tells us a further דין, that even after it left the press, it's on the way to the בור, it's still not יין נסך. So certainly while it's in the press it's not יין נסך. So the משנה should have just said the second דין and we would automatically have known the first דין. And תוספות answers that the משנה is in the form of לא זו אף זו. That many times you find the משנה tells us one דין, and then the משנה continues and says the truth is that the דין goes even a step further. לא זו, not only the דין I told you, אף זו, but also even a step further. And that's what the משנה is doing. First the משנה tells us a דין that the wine that's in the press doesn't become יין נסך, and it continues and says, not only that, but even the wine that started flowing down to the בור is also not יין נסך. That's one פשט תוספות says, and another פשט תוספות says that if the משנה would have just said the second דין, we would have not known the first דין. If the משנה would have just said that the wine doesn't become אסור until it goes into the בור, we would think that when they take the grapes and they put it onto the pile, that is also considered as if it came down to the בור, because that is already the end of the process, so it's similar as if it already entered into the בור. That's why the משנה has to tell us both דינים. First the משנה says that the wine that's in the press is not considered wine even at the time when they're putting the grapes onto the pile, and another דין, that it doesn't become יין נסך till it comes down into the בור. And concerning what the משנה says further, that if the wine and after it went into the בור, מה שבבור אסור והשאר מותר, what's in the בור is אסור and the rest is מותר, it means, as רש״י says, that even if the גוי touched it is מותר. That if it went into the בור and some of it was left in the wine press, so if the גוי touched the wine in the בור, the wine is אסור, but if he touched the wine in the wine press, it's still מותר. And this is similar to the רישא. In the רישא it says that even though he picked the grapes in the press and put it on the תפוח, so he touched the wine that's in the wine press, nevertheless we say it's מותר, so too in the סיפא, when it says that what's left in the wine press is מותר, that even if the גוי touched it, the wine is מותר. Then the משנה continues, דורכין עם הנכרי בגת, you're allowed to squeeze, press the wine together with the גוי in the גת, in the wine press, אבל לא בוצרין עמו, but you are not allowed to glean the grapes with him, you're not allowed to take the grapes off the tree together with the גוי. And the reason for this is, because in the first part when we say you're allowed to help the גוי squeeze the grapes, because since we said before that this תנא holds that the wine that comes out of the grapes in the wine press is not wine yet and is not אסור, ממילא the money that a איד is going to make by working for the גוי will not be considered that he is making profit from איסורי הנאה. If the דין would be that the wine that comes out of the grapes as soon as it's squeezed has a דין of wine, and since it's the גוי's and the גוי touches it it becomes אסור בהנאה, so by the איד helping the גוי, working for the גוי, he is making profit from איסורי הנאה, that wouldn't be allowed. But since we said now that this תנא holds that it doesn't become wine till it goes down into the בור, which means that it's not אסור בהנאה till it goes down to the בור, so when you're squeezing the grapes it's not אסור בהנאה yet, so therefore a איד is allowed to squeeze with him. Now there might be another problem here, and that is the ענין of גורם טומאה. The דין is that you're not allowed to cause for food, even if it's חולין, not תרומה, it doesn't have a special דין, but it's just חולין, plain, ordinary food, but still you're not allowed to cause that food should become טמא in ארץ ישראל. Now therefore the question would be, how can you help the גוי squeeze the grapes, when he's definitely doing it בטומאה, so you're helping him make food which is the grapes or the wine become טמא? And the answer is that this also doesn't apply here, because since the גוי is squeezing it, so the moment it started being squeezed, the juice started coming out, it already became טמא. So therefore the איד is not the one that's making it טמא, it's טמא already from before. And as תוספות explains that therefore you must say that when it says you're allowed to help the גוי squeeze the grapes, it doesn't mean to start squeezing, but it means after it started already. Because to start squeezing, then you would be the one to cause it to become טמא, because till it started, then it's not טמא yet. It only is טמא after it was started to be squeezed. So therefore if a איד would start it would be אסור. So when it says in the משנה you're allowed to help the גוי, it means after the גוי started already. And therefore, since the איד is not the one that's גורם the טומאה to this wine, to these grapes, so therefore he's allowed. But then there might be another question, that the איד is a מסייע ידי עוברי עבירה, that since there is an עבירה in making חולין טמא טמאין בארץ ישראל, so even though the ייד is not the one that's making it טמא, so he himself is not doing the עבירה, but he's helping someone else who is doing the עבירה. And the דין is you're not allowed to help anybody who is doing an עבירה. So רש״י says this is also not true, because who's the one that's making it טמא? The גוי. The גוי was not commanded not to do it. For the גוי, it is not an עבירה, and therefore helping the גוי is not considered helping somebody who is doing an עבירה. So therefore, there is no reason to אסר the ייד from working and helping the גוי squeeze the grapes. But to pick the grapes of the tree, that's not allowed. Why? Because when they pick the grapes of the tree and they put it into the winepress, now the winepress of the גוי is טמא, so by the ייד putting it into the winepress, he is going to be the one to cause the טומאה. Now it doesn't mean that the moment the grape will go into the winepress and the winepress is טמא that grape will become טמא, because the דין is that food doesn't become טמא unless it's first מוכשר לקבל טומאה, if it first became ready to receive טומאה, and then later on if it touches טומאה it'll become טמא. Now what makes food מוכשר לקבל טומאה? If it got wet first. So therefore, the grapes, when they are taken off the tree and put into the כלי which is טמא, doesn't make it טמא, because we assume that the grapes were not wet, because even if they got wet while they were on the tree, that doesn't make it מוכשר. It only is מכשיר לקבל טומאה if it got wet after it was taken off the tree. So therefore, in that short while from when it's taken off the tree till it's put into the winepress, we don't assume it got wet, and therefore then it doesn't become טמא. So we can't say that a ייד, by taking it off the tree and putting it into the press, is actually making the grapes טמא. What we mean here is that since he's putting it into the press, and in the press it will be squeezed, and then the juice will come out and make it מוכשר, and then, being that it's laying in a טמאדיקע winepress it'll become טמא then, so the ייד now is a help to cause the grapes to become טמא later on. So even though he himself is not making it טמא, but he's still גורם טומאה, he is causing it to eventually become טמא, and it's going to be he the one that's doing it, because he is putting it into the טמאדיקע winepress. So therefore, a ייד is not allowed to help a גוי take the grapes off the tree and put it into the winepress. Then the משנה continues: ישראל שהוא עושה בטומאה, if a ייד is doing his work בטומאה, לא דורכין ולא בוצרין עמו, so with a ייד you're not allowed to help him squeeze the grapes, and you're not allowed to help him take the grapes off the tree. And the reason by the ייד you're not even allowed to help him squeeze the grapes, because the ייד that is squeezing the grapes is doing an עבירה, because as we said before, this goes according to the opinion that you're not allowed to cause טומאה for חולין בארץ ישראל, so this ייד that's squeezing it בטומאה is doing an עבירה. So even though the first ייד, the owner, is the one that's going to make it טמא, and therefore he's the one that's doing the עבירה, and the ייד that's going to help him will not make it טמא because it became טמא already when the other ייד started, nevertheless there's a דין that you're not allowed to be מסייע ידי עוברי עבירה, as we said before. You're not allowed to help a person who is doing an עבירה. Since the first ייד is doing an עבירה, so the other ייד is not allowed to work with him and help him, and therefore you're not allowed to even help him squeeze the grapes. By the גוי, since he, the גוי himself is not doing an עבירה because he wasn't commanded, he doesn't have the מצות, so therefore the ייד is not considered a מסייע לידי עוברי עבירה, and therefore he's allowed to squeeze it in the grapes. But by another ייד, since that ייד is commanded not to make it טמא, so the ייד, by helping him, is helping ידי עוברי עבירה, and therefore in this case you're not even allowed to help him squeeze the grapes. אבל מוליכין עמו חביות לגת, but you're allowed to help him carry empty jars to the winepress, ומביאין עמו מן הגת, and you're also allowed to help him carry the full jars of wine from the winepress. And the reason is because at that point there is no עבירה. When you take the empty jars, definitely there is no עבירה. Even later on when you take the full jars of wine from the winepress there is no עבירה, since they became already טמא, and the ייד is not helping him at the time when he is making it טמא, because he is taking it already after it was put into the jars, there is no איסור now in taking טמאדיקע wine in jars. The איסור is causing טומאה to the wine, but now that the wine is made already, so there is no איסור in carrying the טמאדיקע wine in jars, and therefore you're allowed to help him carry the טמאדיקע wine in the jars from the גת, from the winepress. Then the משנה continues: נחתום שהוא עושה בטומאה, a baker that was baking his bread בטומאה, wasn't careful that it should be טהור, and as we said before this goes according to the opinion that you're not allowed to cause חולין בארץ ישראל to become טמא, so לא לשין ולא עורכין עמו, you're not allowed to help him knead the dough, and you're not allowed to help him roll the dough, because you are מסייע ידי עוברי עבירה, because that is the time when he is working and making it טמא, you are not allowed to help him. Even though you are not the one that's making it טמא, but he made it טמא already, but still you are helping ידי עוברי עבירה. אבל מוליכין עמו פת לפלטר, but you're allowed to help him carry the bread after it was already made into dough to the bakery. That you're allowed because the bread became טמא already. So now you are not get involved in helping him make the dough טמא, and therefore you're not considered a מסייע ידי עוברי עבירה. And the גמרא says, אמר רב הונא, רב הונא said, יין, wine, כיון שהתחיל לימשך עושה יין נסך. Wine that's in the wine press, as soon as it started flowing down into the בור, but in that time already if a גוי will touch it, it will turn it into יין נסך. The גמרא asks, תנן, we learned in our משנה, it seems to contradict with it says in our משנה. In our משנה it says, לוקחין גת בעוטה מן העובד כוכבים, ואף על פי שנוטל בידו ונותן לתוך התפוח, that you're allowed to buy the wine press with pressed grapes in it from a גוי even though the גוי picks up the grapes and put it onto the pile and he hit it with his hand, so he touched the wine that's there, still you're allowed. Now this seems to be saying that even though the wine came out of the grapes, and what happens when it comes out of the grapes? The first thing is it starts rolling down that slanty area into the בור. So automatically the wine already started rolling down when he put his hands in to take the grapes out. And nevertheless, it says in the משנה you're allowed to buy it from the גוי and it's not considered יין נסך. So this seems to contradict what רב הונא said that wine, as soon as it starts rolling down from the wine press to the בור, already if a גוי would touch it would make it יין נסך. אמר רב הונא, so רב הונא said,

בגת פקוקה ומלאה. That when are you allowed to buy this the grapes of the wine press? Only if the wine press was stuffed up and was full. Which means that hole that the wine from the wine press rolls down, flows down into the בור, if that hole is stuffed up and also the wine press is full, so then, even if the גוי touched it, it's מותר, but otherwise it's אסור. And the reason it would be מותר then, because since the hole is stuffed up, so the wine that comes out of the grapes doesn't start flowing down. Because as רב הונא said, if it started flowing already, then even though it didn't get to the בור yet, it is already אסור if the גוי touched it. So therefore, if it's stuffed up, it didn't start flowing down yet, and if the גוי touched it, it doesn't make it יין נסך. And in addition to that, it has to be full. Because if it's not full, so as soon as the wine starts coming out of the grapes, since that press is not full, so the wine starts rolling from the grapes till the end of the press. So even though it doesn't start rolling down the slanty area to come into the בור because it was stuffed, but nevertheless it started rolling out of the grapes, flowed around closer to the edge. So already started flowing. But if it was full, so the wine that comes out of the grapes stays in the same place where it came out. So it didn't start flowing at all. In a case like that, if the גוי touches it, it's מותר. But otherwise, רב הונא is right that if it starts flowing and the גוי touches it, it becomes יין נסך. But the גמרא says, תא שמע, come hear. It says further in the משנה,

ואינו עושה יין נסך עד שירד לבור, that it doesn't become יין נסך until it gets to the בור. So we see clearly that even though it started flowing already, but as long as it didn't get to the בור, if a גוי touches it, it doesn't become יין נסך. So this contradicts רב הונא's דין that as soon as it starts flowing, it could become יין נסך. And the גמרא answers, הכא נמי, here too, בגת פקוקה ומלאה. That what the משנה meant to say was, that it doesn't become יין נסך till it actually starts going to the בור. It doesn't mean till it lands in the בור. We're talking here in a case where it was stuffed and it was full. And the משנה is saying that as long as it was stuffed and it was full, so ממילא it never started going to the בור, and therefore it doesn't become יין נסך. But if you open up the פקק, you open up that hole and it starts flowing, so טאקע it would become יין נסך. So the משנה doesn't mean that it doesn't become יין נסך till it lands in the בור, it means till it starts going to the בור. But before that, since it was full and was stuffed up, it didn't start moving yet, and therefore it doesn't become יין נסך. But then the גמרא says, תא שמע, come hear, I'll ask you, it says further in the משנה, ירד לבור מה שבבור אסור, when it enters into the בור, then what's in the בור is אסור, והשאר, but the rest that didn't go into the בור מותר, is מותר. Now this seems to be saying clearly that even though it started going into the בור, only what enters the בור if a גוי touches it is אסור. But if a גוי touched the one that's not in the בור yet doesn't make it אסור even though it started flowing. So this contradicts רב הונא that says that the wine, as soon as it starts flowing, if a גוי touches it, it is יין נסך. אמר רב הונא, so רב הונא said, לא קשיא, it's no קשיא, כאן במשנה ראשונה, כאן במשנה אחרונה. That in one place we're talking about the first משנה, and the other place we're talking about the second משנה. Which means that the דין actually was changed. Originally the דין was the people פסקנ'ד that the גוי who touches the wine before it enters the בור, even though it started flowing, it is מותר. And that's why the משנה says that you're allowed to buy the גת בעוטה from the גוי, because as long as it didn't enter the בור, even though the גוי touched it, it is מותר. But the משנה אחרונה, later on, they changed the פסק דין, and they said that even if the גוי touched it before it entered the בור, as long as it started flowing, it is אסור. So when רב הונא said his דין, that was already the משנה אחרונה. That was the way they פסק'נט later, and therefore there is no contradiction to what it says in the משנה, even though the משנה seems to be saying definitely the opposite of what רב הונא said, because the משנה is going according to the משנה ראשונה. And we טאקע don't פסק'ן like that part of the משנה, because this was written before the פסק דין was changed. דתניא, because we learn in a ברייתא: בראשונה היו אומרים בדד. Originally, first the פסק דין was ב-ד-ד. And as the גמרא will say later, that later they changed from בדד to דבב. Now the word ב-ד-ד and the word ד-ב-ב, these both are words that are סימנים. These are three letters that are סימנים of certain דינים. The ב stands for בוצרין, the ד stands for דורכין, and the other ד stands for דורכין again. So first they פסק'נט a דין concerning בוצרין, and then דורכין, and then דורכין, and later they changed to דורכין, בוצרין, and בוצרין, as the ברייתא will say. The ברייתא says that originally it was ב-ד-ד, meaning that they פסק'נט אין בוצרין עם עובד כוכבים בגת. You're not allowed to help a גוי collect, pick the grapes off the tree and put them into the גת, into the wine press. And the reason for that was שאסור לגרום טומאה לחולין שבארץ ישראל, because you're not allowed to cause חולין in ארץ ישראל to become טמא. So by putting it into the גת, which is טמא, and then it will be squeezed, you are causing the grapes and the wine to become טמא. Therefore, you're not allowed to do it. Also, ואין דורכין עם ישראל שעושה פירותיו בטומאה. You're not allowed to help a ייד even squeeze the grapes if the ייד is doing it בטומאה. Why? שאסור לסייע ידי עוברי עבירה, because you're not allowed to help a person who is doing an עבירה, because the ייד that's squeezing it בטומאה is doing an עבירה because he's causing the חולין, the wine, the grapes, to become טמא. And since you are helping him, you're helping עוברי עבירה. The truth is, you are not causing it to become טמא, as we said before, it is טמא already from before, but still you're helping him during the time when he is making טמא, and therefore you're not allowed to help him squeeze the grapes. אבל

דורכין עם עובד כוכבים בגת, but you are allowed to help a גוי squeeze the grapes in the wine press, ולא חיישינן להא דרב הונא, and we did not care about the סברא that רב הונא said. רב הונא said a סברא that wine, as soon as it starts flowing, if a גוי touches it then it becomes יין נסך. So according to רב הונא's סברא, you shouldn't be able to help a גוי squeeze the grapes in the press, because as soon as the wine comes out of the grape, it starts flowing into the בור, and the גוי touches it, so it becomes יין נסך right then and there. The ייד that's helping the גוי squeeze and is getting paid for it is having הנאה from יין נסך which is אסור בהנאה, so therefore it should be אסור. But nevertheless, they פסק'נט לכתחילה that you are allowed to do this with a גוי because they did not care about the סברא of רב הונא. In other words, originally they did not פסק'ן like רב הונא, and they said that the wine does not start becoming יין נסך till actually it lands in the בור. And therefore, even though the גוי touches the wine after it comes out of the grape, it still doesn't become יין נסך, because they did not care about the סברא of רב הונא. And therefore the ייד that gets paid for squeezing the grape is not considered that he has הנאה from איסור הנאה from יין נסך, and therefore they פסק'נט that a ייד is allowed to help the גוי squeeze the grape.

חזרו לומר דבב, but later they changed the פסק דין and they said that the דין is different: ד-ב-ב. That means that they פסק'נט אין דורכין עם עובד כוכבים בגת, that you're not allowed to help a גוי squeeze the grapes. Why? משום דרב הונא, because of the דין of רב הונא, that we do hold like רב הונא said that the wine, as soon as it starts flowing into the בור, if a גוי touches it, it's יין נסך. And therefore when you help the גוי squeeze the grapes, as soon as the juice comes out of the grape and the גוי touches it, it becomes יין נסך. And the ייד who gets paid for helping him, that means that he makes profit from the יין נסך which is אסור בהנאה, and therefore they פסק'נט that you're not allowed to do it. And also ואין בוצרין עם ישראל שעושה פירותיו בטומאה, and you're not allowed to help a ייד pick the grapes off the tree if he's doing, he's making his פירות working בטומאה, because you are גורם טומאה to those פירות. By taking those פירות off the tree and putting it into a טמא'דיקע כלי, you are causing, as we said before, those פירות to become טמא. And as we said before, that even though at that moment it doesn't become טמא yet, because it's not מוכשר, but since you're putting it into the כלי to be squeezed and then it will become מוכשר, so you are already doing something that eventually it'll become טמא, and that is also אסור. וכל שכן שאין דורכין, and certainly that you're not allowed to help a ייד who is doing it בטומאה squeeze his grapes, because here, you're actually, while you're squeezing it, that's when it's becoming טמא, so he is מסייע ידי עוברי עבירה, so you are helping a person who is doing an עבירה. And even though it might be that you are not the one that's causing it to become טמא because he already made it טמא, but you're helping him at the time when he's doing it. So certainly certainly you're not allowed. אבל בוצרין עם עובד כוכבים בגת, but you are allowed to help a גוי take the פירות off the tree and put it into the winepress. Why? שמותר לגרום טומאה לחולין שבארץ ישראל. Because later they held that you are allowed to cause חולין of ארץ ישראל to become טמא. So therefore, there is nothing wrong in helping the גוי take the פירות off the tree and putting it into the winepress, because the only problem that could be there is that by doing that, you are helping him that eventually the פירות will become טמא, so you are causing those פירות to become טמא. But he holds you are allowed to cause פירות of ארץ ישראל, חולין of ארץ ישראל to become טמא, and then there is nothing wrong. But if so, one might ask right away, so why can't you help a ייד who is working בטומאה take the פירות off the tree? The reason we gave before why you can't help the ייד is because you are גורם for it to become טמא, but now we're saying that we hold that we don't care if you make it טמא, because you're allowed to cause חולין of ארץ ישראל to become טמא. So what is the difference between the ייד and the גוי? How come by the ייד we say that you're not allowed to help him take the פירות and put them into the winepress, while by the גוי we say we are allowed? So

רש״י explains, because there's a big difference. Just to cause חולין of ארץ ישראל to become טמא, you're allowed. But, if we know that this fruit will later on have to become תרומה, because the דין is that from all the things that grow you have to take off תרומה, if the fruit, the fruit is טמאדיק before, so then the תרומה that you will take off will be טמאדיקע תרומה. So it comes out that you're not causing חולין of ארץ ישראל to become טמא, you are causing the תרומה of ארץ ישראל becoming טמא, and that you're not allowed. And that is the difference between the ייד and the גוי. By the גוי, since his food is not טבל, because he has no obligation of taking off תרומות ומעשרות, so therefore we don't say that when you will help him make his פירות טמא, you are causing תרומה of ארץ ישראל to become טמא, because his food won't become תרומה, and therefore, the only problem that could be is the general idea of making חולין טמא. We say that there is no איסור of making חולין of ארץ ישראל טמא, that's why you're allowed. But by a ייד, since he has an obligation of taking off תרומה, so his fruit is טבל, which will eventually be turned into תרומה, some of it will. So by you helping him take it off the tree and putting it into the winepress which is טמא, with this you are causing that תרומה should become טמא, and that you're not allowed, and that's why you're not allowed to help the ייד take the fruit off the tree and put it in the winepress. And certainly you're not help, not allowed to help him squeeze it, because that's actually the time it becomes טמא and you are מסייע ידי עוברי עבירה. What עבירה? The עבירה of causing טבל to become טמא, because this will make the תרומה that comes out of the טבל also טמא. And continuing what it said in the משנה that it doesn't become יין נסך till it goes into the בור, that ירד לבור מה שבבור אסור והשאר מותר, that what does go into the בור is אסור and the rest is מותר. So we learned before the פשט, that means that when the wine enters the בור, then if the גוי touches it, then the wine that's in the בור is אסור through his touching and the rest is מותר because the גוי didn't touch it. This is the way רש״י learns the פשט in the משנה. But there's another פשט in תוספות that when the משנה says that when it goes into the בור, what's in the בור is אסור and the rest is מותר, it doesn't mean that the rest is מותר even if the גוי touched the rest. What it means is that if the גוי touched what's in the בור, what's not in the בור doesn't become יין נסך through his touching what's in the בור. But if the גוי will actually touch what's still in the winepress will become טמא. Not like we said according to רש״י that what the משנה is saying is that even if the גוי touched what's in the winepress, since it's not in the בור it is מותר, what he's saying here, the משנה is telling us that it doesn't become יין נסך through the גוי touching what's in the בור. But if he actually touched what's in the winepress, it does become יין נסך. And the חידוש of the משנה is that we would think that ניצוק חיבור, since there is a flow from the wine in the winepress to the wine in the בור, so we would think that if the גוי touches the wine in the בור, automatically the wine in the winepress, since it's connected through the flow, it would also become יין נסך. But the חידוש of the משנה is that if he touches the wine in the בור, only the wine of the בור is אסור, but the wine in the winepress doesn't become אסור through the connection of the flow. But nevertheless, if the גוי would touch the wine in the winepress, it would become טמא. But תוספות says, from the גמרא is not משמע like that. One of the קשיות תוספות asks is that רב הונא said that wine that started flowing is יין נסך, and the גמרא asked a קשיא on him from our משנה where it says that if it enters the בור it's אסור but the rest is מותר, even though it started flowing. So it's a סתירה. The גמרא could have answered very simply that the משנה, when it says that what's left is מותר, that's in the case where the גוי didn't touch it. He touched the wine in the בור, so therefore, the wine that's in the winepress is not אסור even though it started flowing. When רב הונא said that wine as soon as it starts flowing is already יין נסך means if the גוי will touch that wine that started flowing. But that's not the case of the משנה. And since the גמרא doesn't answer that, obviously the case of the משנה is also when the גוי touched the the wine in the wine press, and nevertheless, since it is still on the wine press, it doesn't become יין נסך.

תוספות bring from the רשב"ם a third פשט, that when it says in the משנה that מה שבבור אסור והשאר מותר, it means even if the גוי did not even touch the wine that's in the בור. The fact that the wine flowed down to the בור with the כח of the גוי, that itself is enough to make it אסור. As the גמרא says later on on דף ע"ב עמוד ב', that the רבנן made a גזירה that if it comes with the כח of the גוי, that this also already has a דין of יין נסך. So therefore, what came into the בור, and it came down with the כח of the גוי, it is יין נסך. The rest, that is not considered wine yet, so that is not אסור. There is no reason for it to become אסור. It is not wine, the גוי didn't touch it, there is no connection of a flow between that wine and the wine that's in the בור, because the בור itself, the wine there wasn't touched, ממילא there is no reason for the wine that's in the wine press should be אסור. And that's what the משנה

means: והשאר מותר.