He who, in making Tamad,1 poured water into lees by measure and obtained the same quantity [of Tamad] is exempt [from the tithe]. And R. Judah makes him liable.2 [Does not this imply that] they are in disagreement only so far as [the case] where only the quantity put in [is extracted], but not where more3 than that quantity [is obtained]? — [No]; they are in disagreement even where more than the quantity put in [has been obtained], and [the reason] why they are in dispute in [the case where only] the quantity put in [has been obtained] is to show you how far-reaching is the view4 of R. Judah.5
R. Nahman b. Isaac inquired of R. Hiyya b. Abin: What [is the law6 in regard to] lees which have the flavour of wine? — He replied unto him: Do you think this is wine? It is a mere acidiferous7 liquor.
Our Rabbis taught: [In the case of] lees of Terumah,8 the first and the second [infusion] are forbidden [to laymen],9 but the third is permitted.10 R. Meir says: Even the third [infusion is forbidden], when [there is in it enough of the wine] to impart a flavour [to the water]. And [in the case] of [second] tithe, the first [infusion] is forbidden,11 [but] the second is permitted. R. Meir says: The second [infusion is] also [forbidden] when [it contains enough of the wine] to impart a flavour [to the water]. And [in the case] of consecrated [lees], the third [infusion] is forbidden, but the fourth is permitted. R. Meir says: The fourth [infusion is] also [forbidden] when [it contains enough of the wine] to impart a flavour [to it].
A contradiction was pointed out [from a Baraitha which states that infusions] of consecrated [things] are forever12 forbidden and [those] of [the second] tithe are always13 permitted. [Surely this shows] a contradiction between [the respective laws relating to] consecrated things and also between those relating to tithe! — There is no contradiction between [the respective laws relating to] consecrated things, [for] here [the law relates] to objects which were themselves14 consecrated, but there [it relates] to objects whose value15 only was consecrated. There is [also] no contradiction between [the respective laws relating to] tithes, [for] here, [the law relates] to that which is certainly tithe, [but] there [it relates] to tithe of Demai.16
R. Johanan said in the name of R. Simeon b. Jehozadak: The same [laws] that have been said [to apply] in respect of their prohibitions17 have similarly been said [to apply] in respect of their making objects fit [for Levitical uncleanness].18 What [kind] of making fit [is meant]? If [the infusion is regarded as consisting] of water, it certainly makes [objects] fit [for the Levitical uncleanness]; [and] if [it is regarded as consisting] of wine it [equally] makes the objects fit. [For what purpose. then, is R. Simeon's statement required?] — It is required in the case where the Tamad19 was made of rain water.20 But since he took up [the rain water] and poured it into the vessel [containing the lees], he [surely] intended them [for use, and consequently there is again no difference between an infusion of wine and one of water. Why, then, R. Simeon's statement]? — It is required [in the case] where the Tamad was made without the aid of human effort.21 But since he draws out [the infusions] one after the other,22 [does he not, thereby,] reveal his intention [of using them]? — R. papa replied: In [the case23 of] a cow which drank the [infusions] one after the others [and, consequently, the owner's intention is not known].24
R. Zutra b. Tobiah said in the name of Rab: The Kiddush25 of the day must be proclaimed on such wine only as is fit to be brought as a drink offering upon the altar. What does this exclude? If it is suggested that it excludes wine [that comes] from his vat,26 [it may be retorted]: Did not R. Hiyya teach, 'One must not bring wine from his vat [as a drink offering], but if already brought, it is permitted [to be used]'; and, since [in the case of offerings] it is permitted when brought, it [should be allowed for Kiddush] even at the start also.27
Baba Bathra 97b
[Moreover,] Raba said: A man may press out a cluster of grapes1 and proclaim over it the Kiddush of the day!2 Or, again, [if it is suggested that the object of Rab's statement is] to exclude3 [the wine] at the mouth4 [of the jug] and at the bottom,5 [it may be retorted]: Did not R. Hiyya teach, 'One must not bring [wine as a drink offering] from [the jug's] mouth or bottom, but if already brought it is permitted [to be used].! And [if it is suggested that the statement] excludes black, white,6 sweet,7 cellar,8 and raisin wine; surely it has been taught9 [that] all these must not be brought, but if brought already they are permitted! And [if it is suggested that the statement] excludes wine [which is] pungent, mixed,10 exposed,11 made of lees, or having an offensive smell as it has been taught [that] in [the case of] all these, one must not bring [them] and even if brought [they remain] unfit, [it may still be retorted], 'to exclude which [of these was this statement made]'? If to exclude pungent wine, [this is surely a matter of] dispute12 between R. Johanan and R. Joshua b. Levi. If to exclude mixed wine, surely [when wine is mixed with water] it is improved, for R. Jose b. Hanina said:13 The Sages agree with R. Eleazar that in [respect of] the cup of grace after meals no benediction may be said over it until water has been poured into it.14 If to exclude exposed [wine], surely it is dangerous.15 If to exclude [wine made] of Iees, [it may be asked], how is this to be understood? If three [jugs of water] were poured in and four [jugs of wine] came out, this [surely] is good wine. If three were poured in, and three and a half came out, this is a [matter of] dispute between the Rabbis and the others!16 But, [this is the object of the statement], viz., to exclude [wine] which has an offensive smell. If preferred, it may be said that [the statement] may even exclude exposed [wine] and, [as to the objection raised,17 it may be replied that it excludes such wine] even though it was passed through a strainer18 in accordance with [the teaching of] R. Nehemiah,19 [it] nevertheless [may not be used for Kiddush, because] Present it20 now unto thy governor; will he be pleased with thee? Or will he accept thy person?21
- To Next Folio -