| 59a. דא"ר יוחנן משום ר"ש בן יהוצדק מים של רבים אין נאסרין הא דיחיד נאסרין,ותיפוק ליה דהא מחוברין נינהו לא צריכא דתלשינהו גלא,סוף סוף אבני הר שנדלדלו נינהו תסתיים דר' יוחנן דאמר אסורות,לא צריכא דטפחינהו בידיה,ר' חייא בר אבא איקלע לגבלא חזא בנות ישראל דמיעברן מעובדי כוכבים שמלו ולא טבלו חזא חמרא דמזגו עובדי כוכבים ושתו ישראל חזא תורמוסא דשלקי להו עובדי כוכבים ואכלי ישראל ולא אמר להו ולא מידי,אתא לקמיה דרבי יוחנן א"ל צא והכרז על בניהם שהן ממזרים ועל יינן משום יין נסך ועל תורמוסן משום בישולי עובדי כוכבים משום שאינן בני תורה,על בניהם שהם ממזרים ר' יוחנן לטעמיה דא"ר יוחנן לעולם אינו גר עד שימול ויטבול וכיון דלא טביל עובד כוכבים הוא ואמר רבה בר בר חנה א"ר יוחנן עובד כוכבים ועבד הבא על בת ישראל הולד ממזר,וגזור על יינם משום יין נסך משום לך לך אמרין נזירא סחור סחור לכרמא לא תקרב,ועל תורמוסן משום בישולי עובדי כוכבים לפי שאינן בני תורה טעמא דאינן בני תורה הא בני תורה שרי והאמר רב שמואל בר רב יצחק אמר רב כל שנאכל כמות שהוא חי אין בו משום בישולי עובדי כוכבים,ר' יוחנן כי הך לישנא ס"ל דאמר רב שמואל בר רב יצחק אמר רב כל שאינו עולה לשולחן של מלכים ללפת בו את הפת אין בו משום בישולי עובדי כוכבים טעמא דאינן בני תורה הא בני תורה שרי,בעו מיניה מרב כהנא עובד כוכבים מהו שיוליך ענבים לגת אמר להו אסור משום לך לך אמרין נזירא סחור סחור לכרמא לא תקרב איתיביה רב יימר לרב כהנא עובד כוכבים שהביא ענבים לגת בסלין | 59a. b as Rabbi Yoḥa says in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: Water that belongs to /b the b public /b is b not rendered prohibited. /b The Gemara infers that since water that belongs to the public is permitted, b therefore, /b in a case where gentiles bow to water that is owned b by an individual /b it is b rendered prohibited. /b ,The Gemara challenges: b But /b Rabbi Yoḥa could b derive /b that even water owned by an individual is permitted, b as /b the water b is connected /b to the ground, and worshipping an object that is connected to the ground does not render it prohibited. The Gemara explains: b No, /b it is b necessary /b to derive this i halakha /i from the fact that the water belongs to the public in a case b where a wave /b raised the water and b detached it /b from the ground. In this case worshipping water owned by an individual would render it prohibited.,The Gemara challenges: Nevertheless, the water b ultimately /b falls into the category of objects that were detached without human involvement, such as b boulders of a mountain that dislodged /b on their own. The Gemara (46a) cites a dispute between Rabbi Yoḥa and the sons of Rabbi Ḥiyya with regard to boulders that dislodged without human involvement and were then worshipped, and does not conclude who deems the boulders permitted and who deems them prohibited. b May it be concluded /b from Rabbi Yoḥa’s statement b that /b it is b Rabbi Yoḥa who says /b that the boulders b are prohibited? /b ,The Gemara replies: b No, /b even if Rabbi Yoḥa deems the boulders permitted, his ruling with regard to the water is b necessary /b in a case b where /b one b struck /b the water b with his hand /b and thereby detached it. Since it was detached due to human involvement, if the water was owned by an individual it is prohibited.,§ b Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba happened /b to come b to Gavla. He saw Jewish women /b there b who were impregnated by gentiles who /b were in the process of converting and b were circumcised but had not /b yet b immersed /b in a ritual bath. b He /b also b saw wine that gentiles diluted /b with water b and Jews /b then b drank /b the wine. b He /b also b saw lupines that gentiles were cooking and Jews were eating. And /b despite seeing all this, b he did not say anything to them /b to correct their actions.,Later, b he came before Rabbi Yoḥa /b and told him what he had seen. Rabbi Yoḥa b said to him: Go and declare about their children that they /b have the status of b children born from an incestuous or adulterous relationship [ i mamzerim /i ]. And /b decree b with regard to their wine /b that it is prohibited b as /b an extension of the prohibition of b wine /b used for b a libation. And with regard to their lupines /b you should declare that they are forbidden b due to /b the prohibition of b food cooked by gentiles, as they are not people /b well-versed in b Torah, /b and any leniency would be misunderstood and applied too extensively.,The Gemara explains that with regard to declaring b about their children that they /b have the status of b i mamzerim /i , Rabbi Yoḥa /b conforms b to his /b standard line of b reasoning /b concerning two i halakhot /i . The first is b as Rabbi Yoḥa says: /b One b is never /b deemed to be b a convert until he has been circumcised and has immersed. And since /b the father b has not immersed, he is /b still considered b a gentile. And /b the second i halakha /i is as b Rabba bar bar Ḥana says /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa says: /b In the case of b a gentile or /b a Canaanite b slave who engaged in intercourse with a Jewish woman, the offspring is a i mamzer /i . /b ,The Gemara continues to explain Rabbi Yoḥa’s second instruction to Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba: b And decree with regard to their wine /b that it is prohibited b as /b an extension of the prohibition of b wine /b used for b a libation. /b Although the gentile did not touch the wine when he diluted it, it is prohibited b due to /b the maxim: b Go, go, we say /b to b a nazirite; go around /b and b go around, /b but b do not come near to the vineyard. /b ,Lastly, Rabbi Yoḥa instructed Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba to decree b with regard to their lupines /b that they are forbidden b due to /b the prohibition of b food cooked by gentiles, as they are not people /b well-versed in b Torah. /b The Gemara asks: b The reason /b that the lupines are deemed prohibited is b because they are not people /b well-versed in b Torah; but /b in the case of b people /b who are well-versed in b Torah, /b one can infer that the lupines b are permitted. But doesn’t Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak say /b that b Rav says: Anything that is eaten raw is not subject to /b the prohibition of b food cooked by gentiles, /b even when cooked by them? Lupines are not eaten raw due to their bitterness, and therefore they are subject to the prohibition of food cooked by gentiles.,The Gemara answers: b Rabbi Yoḥa holds in accordance with that /b other b version /b of Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak’s statement, b as Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak says /b that b Rav says: Anything that /b lacks importance and therefore b does not appear on the table of kings /b in order b to be eaten together with bread is not subject to /b the prohibition of b food cooked by gentiles. /b Lupines are not sufficiently important to be served on the table of kings, and therefore they are permitted even if cooked by gentiles. Consequently, b the reason /b for prohibiting the residents of Gavla from eating them is b because they are not people /b well-versed in b Torah. But /b in the case of b people /b well-versed in b Torah, /b the lupines b are permitted. /b ,§ The Sages b asked Rav Kahana: /b With regard to b a gentile, what is /b the i halakha /i concerning the following question: b May he bring grapes to the winepress /b without doing anything else to them? Rav Kahana b said to them: /b It is b prohibited /b by rabbinic decree b due to /b the maxim: b Go, go, we say /b to b a nazirite; go around /b and b go around, /b but b do not come near to the vineyard. Rav Yeimar raised an objection to Rav Kahana /b from a i baraita /i : With regard to b a gentile who brought grapes to the winepress in baskets /b |
