1) TOSFOS DH LOKCHIN

תוספות ד"ה לוקחין

(SUMMARY: Tosfos lists three different texts of our Mishnah.)

אע"פ שנוטל בידו ונותן לתפוח אינו נעשה יין נסך עד שירד לבור כך הגירסא

(a) Text #1: Even though the Nochri takes in his hand and puts it onto the top of the heap of grapes, it is not made into Yayin Nesech until it goes into the pit. This is the text of the Mishnah.

ויש ספרים שגורסין שאינו והוי סיפא פירוש דרישא

(b) Text #2: Some Sefarim have the text "she'Aino" instead of "Aino (which is the text in the explanation above)." According to both of these texts, the second part of the statement explains the first part (see Maharam).

אבל אותן ספרים שגורסין ואינו בוי"ו וא"כ נשמע דין אחר שאפי' נגע עובד כוכבים בקילוח המושך מן הגת וירד לבור אינו נאסר

(c) Text #3: However, there are Sefarim that have the text, "v'Aino." This teaches a different law, that even if the Nochri touched the flow of juice coming from the press into the pit, the wine is not forbidden (and cannot be forbidden until he touches it while it is in the pit).

וקשיא אמאי אצטריך למיתני אע"פ שנוטל בידו ונותן לתפוח הא מסיפא שמעינן יותר שאינו נעשה יין נסך כלל עד שירד לבור

(d) Question: This is difficult. Why is it necessary for the Mishnah to state, "even if he takes it in his hand and puts it on the pile of grapes" if the second part of the statement is that it cannot become Yayin Nesech at all until it is in the pit?

וי"ל דלא זו אף זו קתני

(e) Answer #1: The Mishnah must be saying not only is not Yayin Nesech if he takes it in his hand etc., but it even cannot become Yayin Nesech unless it is in the pit.

א"נ תנא סיפא לגלויי רישא דלא תימא דנתינה לתפוח כשהכל נאסף אל התפוח הוי כאילו ירד לבור קמ"ל סיפא דירד לבור דוקא

(f) Answer #2: Alternatively, the Mishnah said the second statement to explain the first statement. You should not say that putting it on the heap of grapes when everything is gathered there is like it is already in the pit. The second statement teaches that it is only able to become Yayin Nesech in the pit.

2) TOSFOS DH YARAD

תוספות ד"ה ירד

(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses how the wine becomes forbidden in the pit.)

פ"ה אם נגע בו עובד כוכבים אחרי כן משמע מתוך פירושו דר"ל והשאר מותר ואפי' יגע בו עובד כוכבים

(a) Explanation #1: Rashi explains that the wine only becomes Yayin Nesech if the Nochri touched it after it entered the pit. This indicates that the rest of the wine is permitted, even if the Nochri touched it.

וכן נראה דנימא דקתני סיפא דומיא דרישא דנתינה לתפוח מיירי בנגיעה אף מותר דסיפא מיירי בנגיעה

(b) Proof: This seems correct, as according to this explanation the second part of the Mishnah matches the first part of the Mishnah. Just as the Mishnah discusses the Nochri touching the heap of grapes and it is permitted, so too the second part of the Mishnah that states it is permitted is referring to a case where the Nochri touched it.

אבל אין לפרש דר"ל והשאר מותר שאינו נאסר כשנגע העובד כוכבים במה שבבור ע"י נצוק אבל ודאי אם נגע העובד כוכבים הוי אסור במגע עובד כוכבים דשפיר הוי קרוי יין כיון שנתן הכל אל התפוח

(c) Implied Question: One should not explain that this means that the rest is permitted, and it is not even forbidden through Nitzuk (the continuous stream of wine) if the Nochri touches what is in the pit. However, certainly if the Nochri now (after there is some wine in the pit, see Avodah Berurah) touches the wine that is on the press it would be forbidden through the touching of the Nochri, as it is called wine because all of the grapes were already put on the pile. (Why isn't this a valid explanation?)

דא"כ כי מקשה מינה בגמ' לרב הונא דאמר כיון שהתחיל לימשך עושה יין נסך לישני ליה דרב הונא איירי במגע עובד כוכבים דמתני' נמי הכא אסרה דלא שריא השאר אלא ע"י נצוק

(d) Answer: If so, when the Gemara asks on Rav Huna who says that once the wine starts to flow downwards that it can become Yayin Nesech, the Gemara should answer that Rav Huna is referring to a Nochri touching the wine once it starts flowing downwards (and when there is already some wine in the pit), which our Mishnah also stated can be forbidden. The Mishnah only meant that if the wine is in the pit and it is touched by a Nochri, it does not forbid the rest of the stream of wine that did not yet flow into the pit through Nitzuk.

וכ"ת דמקשי מ"מ שפיר דסמיך אהא דשמעי' ליה לרב הונא דאית ליה בפ"ב (לקמן עב.) דנצוק חבור ובמתניתין משמע דנצוק אינו חבור מדקא שרי השאר שבגת

(e) Implied Question: You might say that the Gemara still asks a good question, as it relies upon Rav Huna's position later (72a) that Nitzuk connects, which is obviously against the position of our Mishnah that Nitzuk does not connect. This is apparent from the fact that our Mishnah holds that the rest of the wine does not become forbidden through Nitzuk. (Why, then, isn't this a viable explanation?)

דא"כ הוה ליה לתלמודא לאתויי מלתיה דרב הונא דלקמן כיון דמכח דההיא פריך

(f) Answer: If this was the Gemara's question, the Gemara should have quoted Rav Huna's statement later (ibid.), as this is the crux of the question.

לכן נראה כפי' רש"י דמיירי מתניתין דהשאר מותר אף בנגיעת עובד כוכבים

(g) Opinion: It therefore appears that Rashi is correct in his explanation that our Mishnah holds that the rest of the wine that is not in the pit is permitted, even if it is touched by a Nochri.

והשתא ניחא דליכא לשנויי בגמ' דמתניתין לא מיירי במגע עובד כוכבים ורב הונא איירי במגע עובד כוכבים דע"כ מתני' נמי מיירי במגע עובד כוכבים כדפרישית

1. Opinion (cont.): It is now understandable why the Gemara does not answer that our Mishnah is not discussing wine touched by a Nochri (while on the press before it is in the pit, although some wine has already went into the pit), while Rav Huna is discussing wine touched by a Nochri. It must be that our Mishnah is also discussing wine touched by a Nochri, as we have explained.

ור"י פי' דודאי מיירי במתני' בנצוק נמי ואשמעינן שהשאר אינו נאסר מטעם נצוק

(h) Proof: The Ri explains that certainly our Mishnah is also discussing Nitzuk, and it is teaching us that the rest of the wine does not become forbidden due to Nitzuk.

מדקאמר עלה בגמרא לא שנו אלא שלא החזיר גרגותני לגת פי' ואז מותר שאינו נאסר מטעם נצוק בר נצוק ופריך גרגותני גופה במאי מתסרא ומשני בנצוק אלמא מתני' נמי מיירי בנצוק כדפרישית

1. Proof (cont.): This is apparent from the fact that Rav Huna says in the Gemara that we only learned this regarding a case when he did not return the basket (that acts as a filter) to the press. This means that it (the wine in the pit after a Nochri touched the grapes on the press) is permitted because it is not forbidden due to Nitzuk bar Nitzuk (two different streams, one from the press to the basket which filters out the solid pieces, and the other from the basket to the pit). The Gemara asks, how is the basket itself forbidden? The Gemara answers that it must be through Nitzuk. This implies that the Mishnah does discuss Nitzuk, as I have explained.

ורשב"ם פי' מה שבבור אסור אף בלא נגיעת עובד כוכבים מטעם כחו של עובד כוכבים דגזרי ביה רבנן כדאמרינן לקמן בפ"ב (דף עב:)

(i) Explanation #2: The Rashbam explains that what is in the pit is forbidden even without it being touched by Nochrim (while it is in the pit, although it was stomped on by a Nochri in the press) due to the force of the Nochri, which the Gemara later (72b) states that the Rabbanan decreed that it is prohibited.

וה"נ מכח דריכתו בגת נמשך היין ויורד לבור והשאר מותר שאינו נאסר מכחו כיון שאינו עדיין יין וגם אינו נאסר לא במגע ולא בנצוק כדפרישית

1. Explanation #2 (cont.): Similarly, due to his pressing on the grapes in the press the wine goes into the pit. Everything else is permitted means that it is not forbidden due to his force (when it is in the press) being that it is not yet wine, and it cannot become forbidden (at this early stage) through being touched or Nitzuk, as we have explained.

3) TOSFOS DH V'HA'SHA'AR

תוספות ד"ה והשאר

(SUMMARY: Tosfos sides with Rashi that the wine is even permitted for drinking, as opposed to Rabeinu Shmaya who says it is not.)

פי' אף בשתיה כפ"ה

(a) Opinion #1: Rashi explains that this means it is even permitted for drinking.

אבל הר"ר שמעיה פי' מותר בהנאה דאינו נעשה יין נסך ליאסר בהנאה עד שירד לבור אבל בשתיה מיהא אסור

(b) Opinion #2: However, Rabeinu Shmayah says that it is permitted for benefit, as it does not become Yayin Nesech to become forbidden from benefit until it goes into the pit. However, it is forbidden to drink it.

וכן ברישא לוקחים גת בעוטה כו' אע"פ שנוטל כו' ואינו חשוב כאיסורי הנאה

1. Opinion #2 (cont.): Similarly, when the first part of the Mishnah states that one can buy pressed grapes that were pressed by a Nochri etc., it means that it is not forbidden from benefit.

והקשה הר"ר אלחנן חדא דלשון לוקחין משמע דמותר אף בשתיה

(c) Question #1: Rabeinu Elchanan asks that first of all, the term "one can purchase" indicates that the juice pressed by the Nochri is even permitted to be drunk.

ועוד דבגמ' כי פריך לרב הונא לישני ליה דמותר דמתני' היינו בהנאה וכי קאמר רב הונא בשתיה קאמר

(d) Question #2: Additionally, when the Gemara asks a question on Rav Huna, it should answer that when our Mishnah says it is permitted, it means for benefit. This is as opposed to Rav Huna, who was discussing being able to drink the wine.

ואי פריך משום דהזכיר רב הונא יין נסך דמשמע אף בהנאה הא לקמן נמי קאמר רב תינוק בן יומו עושה יין נסך והיינו בשתיה דוקא כדלקמן (דף נז.) בגמ'

1. Question #2 (cont.): If you will say that the Gemara asks its question because Rav Huna mentioned Yayin Nesech, which implies that it is even forbidden from benefit, the Gemara later also quotes Rav as saying that even a day old child causes wine to become Yayin Nesech. This is specifically regarding drinking wine, as stated later (57a) in the Gemara.

לכך נראה לפרש כפי' רש"י

(e) Opinion #1: It therefore appears that Rashi is correct.

והא דאמרינן בפ"ב (לקמן דף עד:) גבי גת של אבן שזפתה עובד כוכבים ינגב ושל עץ רבי אומר ינגב וחכ"א יקלוף הזפת ואיכא דאמר דוקא זפתה אבל דרך בה לא סגי לה בניגוב ואמאי הא קתני הכא דלוקחים גת בעוטה

(f) Question: The Gemara later (74b) states regarding a stone press that a Nochri covered with pitch that it should be dried off. If it was a wooden press, Rebbi says it should be dried off, while the Chachamim say that the pitch should be peeled off. Some say that this is only if the Nochri put the pitch on the press. However, if he pressed grapes with it, it is not enough to dry it. Why? Our Mishnah clearly states that one can even buy pressed grapes of a Nochri!

ויש לומר דהתם איירי למשנה אחרונה דקי"ל כוותיה

(g) Answer: It is possible to answer that the case there is referring to the Mishnah Acharonah that we indeed rule like.

וכי פריך התם מתניתין אברייתא הוה מצי לשנויי כאן למשנה ראשונה כאן למשנה אחרונה

(h) Implied Question: When the Gemara there asks that the Mishnah and Beraisa seemingly argue, it could have answered that one is according to the Mishnah Rishonah and one is according to the Mishnah Acharonah. (Why didn't the Gemara give this answer?)

אלא ניחא ליה למימר מתניתין בלא דרך בה ברייתא בדרך בה ולאוקומי תרוייהו למשנה אחרונה

(i) Answer: However, it was better for the Gemara to say that the Mishnah is referring to a case where the Nochri did not press, while the Beraisa is referring to a case where he did press, and to say that both are according to the Mishnah Acharonah.

4) TOSFOS DH DORCHIN

תוספות ד"ה דורכין

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that our Mishnah means one can step on the grapes at the end of the processing.)

פ"ה ומשום גרם טומאה ליכא דמשעה שדרך בהן עובד כוכבים מעט נטמאו משמע מתוך פירושו שדורכין בסוף דריכה קאמר

(a) Opinion #1: Rashi explains that there is no problem of causing impurity, as once the Nochri stepped on it, it has become impure. This indicates that the stepping is done at the end of the pressing.

וכן נראה לר"י דאין לפרש דורכין בתחלת דריכה ומטעם שנטמא הכל בגת טמאה

1. Opinion #1 (cont.): The Ri understands that one should not explain that stepping means in the beginning of the pressing, and is because everything has become impure once it touches the impure press.

דא"כ ישראל העושה פירותיו בטומאה אמאי לא דורכין עמו כיון שנטמא הכל בגת טמא

2. Opinion #1 (cont.): If so, one should also be able to join a Jew who makes his fruit when impure, being that everything was already made impure from the impure press. (The Maharsha explains that the reason we forbid joining a Jew who is pressing when impure is because one cannot join him when he is making these fruits impure, which he is not supposed to do. Even though the fruit will become impure anyway through his impure stepping, one should not show support for him by joining him when he is doing so. However, if it would already become impure by loading it onto the press, Chazal would not have forbade another Jew (especially if he needs to make money) from stepping on it, as it already became impure before anyone stepped on it. The fact that Chazal forbade stepping with the Jew is the proof of the Ri to Rashi that the fruit only becomes impure after it is stepped on at the end of the process, not through the loading.)

לכך נראה כפרש"י דבסוף דריכה קאמר

3. Opinion #1 (cont.): It therefore appears that Rashi's explanation is correct, that the stepping is at the end of the pressing.

וכן משמע בירושלמי דקתני דורכין עם העובד כוכבים בגת הדא דאת אמרת והוא שהלכו עליו דריכת שתי וערב אבל לא הלכו עליהן שתי וערב לא

(b) Proof: This is also implied by the Yerushalmi that says one can step with the Nochrim on a press. The Yerushalmi continues that this is only if they stepped across the length and the width. However, if they did not, one cannot do so.

55b----------------------------------------55b

5) TOSFOS DH AVAL LO BOTZRIN

תוספות ד"ה אבל לא בוצרין

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains one does not harvest with a Nochri because he puts the grapes on an impure press.)

פ"ה לפי שנותנין בגת טמאה

(a) Explanation: Rashi explains that this is because they put the grapes in an impure press.

וה"ה דהוה מצי למימר שמא יבצרנו בכלים טמאים

(b) Implied Question: One could also say that this is because we suspect that he will harvest the grapes with impure vessels. (Why didn't Rashi give this explanation?)

ונ"ל כי לפי מה שפ"ה ניחא דאפי' אם בצרם בכלים טמאים לא נטמאו עד שלא הוכשרו דסתמא לא הוכשרו

(c) Answer: It appears to me that based on what Rashi says, it is understandable that even if he harvested the grapes in impure vessels they will not become impure until they are enabled to become impure. They probably were not able to become impure before they were put onto the press (where the liquid which the owner wants makes them able to become impure from the impure press).

6) TOSFOS DH AVAL MOLICHIN

תוספות ד"ה אבל מוליכין

(SUMMARY: Tosfos and Rashi argue regarding the definition of a Paltar.)

פ"ה אופה הפת

(a) Explanation #1: Rashi explains that a Paltar is the one who bakes the bread.

ולא נהירא דה"ל למימר לתנור

(b) Question #1: This is difficult, as the Mishnah should have said that one cannot take the bread to the oven to be baked (as opposed to "to the Paltar").

ועוד דאמרינן בתוספתא אין מסייעין נחתום העושה בטומאה ואין מוליכין עמו (גרונות) לתנור

(c) Question #2: Additionally, we say in the Tosefta that one cannot help a baker who is baking while impure, and one cannot help him take bread to the oven.

לכך נראה פלטר נחתום קטן שלוקחין הרבה ככרות ביחד מן הנחתום גדול כדי למוכרם על יד על יד וטעמא דמוליכין עמו פת לפלטר היינו משום שכבר נגמרה מלאכת העבודה וזו מלאכה אחרת היא אבל ודאי הולכה לתנור אסורה שזו היא סוף הלישה

(d) Explanation #2: It therefore appears that a Paltar is a small baker who takes many loaves from a Nachtom (a big baker) at once in order to sell them in individual units. The reason that one can take bread from the baker to the Paltar is because the work of baking is already finished, and this is a new type of work. However, it is certainly forbidden to take the dough to be baked in the oven, as this is the end of the process of kneading the dough.

ובפרק הזהב (ב"מ דף נו.) נמי משמע דפלטר הוא נחתום קטן דקתני נחתום מחד גברא זבין פלטר מתרי תלת גברי זבין ובירושלמי נמי קאמר פלטר משתמש הוא בכמה נחתומין

(e) Proof: In Bava Metzia (56a), the Gemara implies that a Paltar is a small baker. This is because it says there that a Nachtom buys from one person, whereas a Paltar buys from two or three people. The Yerushalmi also states that a Paltar uses many different Nachtomim (i.e. he sells bread from many Nachtomim).

7) TOSFOS DH AMAR RAV HUNA

תוספות ד"ה א"ר הונא

(SUMMARY: Rashi and Rabeinu Tam argue regarding when the wine is considered to be "flowing," and hence able to become Yayin Nesech.)

פ"ה שהגת עשויה במדרון ומשעה שהוא נמשך מצד העליון לצד התחתון קרוי יין ובסמוך נמי פירש בגת פקוקה ומלאה ולא נמשך בה היין ולא זז ממקומו אלא במקום שנסחט שם עומד

(a) Explanation #1: Rashi explains that a press is made on a slant. Once the wine goes from the upper area towards the lower area it is called wine. The Gemara later also explains that this is referring to a press that is totally stopped up and full, and therefore the wine is not flowing or moving at all. Rather, wherever it is pressed is where it stays.

נראה מתוך פירושו דאפי' בגת עצמה אם פינה החרצנים אילך ואילך ונשאר היין לצד אחד הוי התחיל לימשך וה"ה נמי בגיגיות שלנו שדורכים בהם

1. Explantion #1 (cont.): Rashi implies that even if one the press itself there is a division, meaning that the peels are cleared to one side and the wine is on another side, this is considered that the wine is starting to flow. This is also the case with out barrels that we use for stepping on the grapes (that if the peels are cleared to one side it is deemed that the wine has started to flow).

וכן פי' רשב"ם בשם רש"י וז"ל הלכה כמשנה אחרונה כרב הונא דאמר יין כיון שהתחיל לימשך עושה יין נסך ואם מפנין גרעינים שבגיגיות אילך ואילך כדי שיכנס היין באמציעותו נראה (לר"י) [לרש"י] אין לך המשכה גדולה מזו ועושה יין נסך עכ"ל

2. Explanation #1 (cont.): The Rashbam also explains in the name of Rashi as follows. The law is like the Mishnah Acharonah, like Rav Huna who says that once the wine starts to flow it can become Yayin Nesech. If the seeds in the barrels are moved to the side in order that the wine should gather in the middle of the barrel, Rashi understands that there is no status of starting to flow greater than this, and therefore a Nochri can now make it into Yayin Nesech.

וצ"ל לפירושו שפינה הגרעינים עד שולי הגיגית שאם לא פינה כי אם למעלה אין כאן המשכה כיון שיש ענבים תחתיה

3. Explanation #1 (cont.): One must say according to the Rashbam that he cleared the seeds from the bottom of the barrel. If he did not, and only cleared the top part of the barrel from the seeds, this is not considered flowing being that there are grapes underneath.

תדע דהא תנן במתני' אע"פ שנוטל בידו ונותן לתפוח וא"כ פינה הענבים אילך ואילך ואפ"ה שרי בגת פקוקה ומלאה אפי' לרב הונא כדמשני בסמוך אלא לאו ש"מ דההיא איכא לאוקומי שעדיין לא פינה עד שולי הגת

i. Proof: This is apparent from the Mishnah's statement that this is even if he took the grapes with his hand and put them on the pile of grapes. If so, he moved the grapes aside. Even so, the Mishnah permits these grapes if the press is stopped up and full, even according to Rav Huna as the Gemara answers later. Rather, it must be that the case is where he did not yet move aside the grapes all the way to the end of the press (and it is therefore not considered flowing).

ור"ת פירש שהתחיל לימשך שהתחיל לקלח מן הגת קודם שירד לבור ופריך תנן לוקחין גת בעוטה אע"פ שנוטל בידו ונותן לתפוח ומשמע אפי' התחיל לימשך ומשני בגת פקוקה שנפקק הצינור ואינו מקלח כלל

(b) Explanation #2: Rabeinu Tam explains that this means that the wine started to flow from the press, but it has not yet reached the pit. The Gemara asks that the Mishnah says one can buy grapes that have been pressed by a Nochri, even though he took them with his hand and put them on the pile of grapes. This indicates that it is even if the wine started flowing. The Gemara answers that the case is where the press is stopped up, meaning that the pipe where the wine flows to the pit is stopped up, and no wine is flowing into the pit.

ולא גרסינן ומלאה וכן בפי' רב"ח לא גריס ליה

1. Text: We do not have the text (according to Rabeinu Tam) "and it is full." (This is because it does not matter whether or not it is full as long as the pipe is blocked, which does not allow wine to flow into the pit.) Rabeinu Chananel also does not have this text.

ואי גרסינן ליה בעי למימר ומלאה שעומדת על מלואה שאינו נמשך כלל לצד הבור

2. Text (cont.): If one does have this text (and gives the explanation of Rabeinu Tam), he must explain that "and it is full" means that it stays full, and does not flow at all towards the pit.

ולפי' זה אם פינה הענבים אילך ואילך ונשאר היין בגומא באמצע הגיגית אין כאן המשכה כיון שלא הניח שם גרגותני לסנן היין אבל אם מושך היין מן הגיגית דרך הברזא אין לך המשכה גדולה מזו

3. Explanation: Based on this explanation, if he moved the grapes aside and the wine was left in a hole in the middle of the barrel, there is no flow, being that a basket was not put there to filter the wine (from the peels and seeds). However, if the wine flows out of the barrel through a spout, this would certainly be considered a flow.

או אם שולה בגומא שבתוך הגיגית כוס מלא יין אם הוא מתכוין לשלותו מן החרצנים ומן הזגין יש לחוש קצת להמשכה ואם אינו מקפיד בחרצנים ובזגין אין כאן המשכה ושרי

4. Explanation: Alternatively, if he drew a cup full of wine from the hole in the middle of the barrel, if he intends to draw the wine away from the peels and seeds, one must suspect that the wine is considered to be flowing. If he does not care if the peels and seeds come up in the wine, it is not considered to be flowing and it is therefore permitted.

וא"ת כיצד לוקחין יין בגיגיות העובדי כוכבים המלאות ענבים דרוכות למה אין לנו לחוש כי שמא כבר המשיכו העובדי כוכבים יין מהם וחזרו ומלאום ענבים

(c) Question: How can we buy wine in the barrels of Nochrim that are full of pressed grapes? Why don't we suspect that the Nochrim already drew wine from them, and then filled them with grapes?

דבשלמא בגיגיות קטנות שבוצרין בהן ומביאין אותן מן הכרם אין לחוש כי אין דרך להמשיך יין מהם

1. Question (cont.): It is understandable that in small barrels where the grapes are placed when they are harvested and they are then brought in them from the orchard that there is no suspicion of Yayin Nesech. This is because it is not normal to separate the wine (from the seeds and peels) completely in these barrels.

אבל בגיגיות גדולות יש לחוש כיון שהעלים ישראל עיניו מהם ומחמת חשש זה יש שעומדים שם בבציר כשממלאין הגיגית ואח"כ חותמין אותה כשרוצין שישהא היין בגיגית ב' ימים או ג' ימים

2. Question (cont.): However, in big barrels there is reason to suspect Yayin Nesech as the Jew was not watching them. Due to this suspicion, there are some who watch when the harvest is done and when the workers are filling up the barrels with grapes. They seal the barrel when they want the wine to be in the barrel for two or three days.

ומביאים ראיה מהירושלמי דקאמר על מתני' דלוקחין גת בעוטה תני ר' חנין והוא שלא העלים ישראל עיניו ממנו

i. Proof: They prove that this is necessary from the Yerushalmi that says on our Mishnah that one can buy harvested and pressed grapes from a Nochri that Rebbi Chanin says that this is only if the Jew did not take his eyes off the processing.

ועוד כתב שם בהלכות דורכין עם העובד כוכבים ומסייעין אותו אם נתעלם מעיניהם נעשה יין נסך אלמא משמע מתוך הירושלמי שיש לחוש למשנה ראשונה לשמא יחזיר גרגותני לגת או למשנה אחרונה לשמא ממשיך ממנו

ii. Proof (cont.): Additionally, the Bahag writes that one can step on grapes together with a Nochri and help him. However, if the processing is hidden from his eyes, it becomes Yayin Nesech. The Yerushalmi therefore implies that one should suspect according to the Mishnah Rishonah that the filter basket was returned to the press, or according to the Mishnah Acharonah that it is possible someone drew wine from it.

אבל ר"י פי' שיש להקל ולומר שהירושלמי לא אסר אלא בגת בעוטה יפה ויש בה יין הרבה ויבא לימשוך ממנה בקל אבל הגיגיות שלנו אין בהם יין כל כך לפי שאינם דרוכות יפה ולא חיישינן להמשכה

(d) Answer #1: The Ri explains that one can be lenient. He says that the Yerushalmi possibly only forbids a press with very pressed grapes. This is why we should suspect that a Nochri easily drew a cup of wine from it. However, our barrels of grapes do not contain a lot of wine because the grapes are not very pressed. We therefore do not suspect that one will draw wine from it (both according to the Mishnah Rishonah and Mishnah Acharonah).

ורבינו יהודה פי' דהירושלמי קאי אמשנה אחרונה וכגון שהמשיכו ממנו כבר ונעשה יין ולפיכך נאסר בהעלמת העין דיש לחוש שמא החזיר כלי הבור או גרגותני לגת

(e) Answer #2: Rabeinu Yehudah explains that the Yerushalmi is only according to the Mishnah Acharonah. The case is where the wine flowed and they drew wine from the press. Accordingly, the fact that it was not watched causes it to be forbidden, as the Nochri may have returned this vessel used to draw wine to the pit, or he might have put the filter basket by the press.

וההיא דר' חנין נמי קאי אמתני' דקתני ירד לבור מה שבבור אסור והשאר מותר

1. Answer #2 (cont.): Rebbi Chanin was referring to our Mishnah which states that if the wine went to the pit, what is in the pit is forbidden and the rest is permitted.

והשתא איכא למיחש בהא דכיון שירד היין מן הגת לבור יש לחוש שמא יחזיר כלי הבור וגרגותני לגת ולכך צריך שלא יעלים ישראל עיניו

2. Answer #2 (cont.): We now have reason to suspect that being that the wine went down from the press to the pit, it is possible that the vessels of the pit and the filter basket were returned to the press. This is why the Jew cannot take away his eyes from the press.

ועוד כתב רבינו יהודה וז"ל ומאד יש להחמיר בצידי המשכה והמחמיר לתת סדין על הגיגית ולמלאות הגיגית ולחותמה תבא עליו ברכה ויש שהיו רוצין למצוא חן בעיני העובדי כוכבים והיו העובדי כוכבים דורכים עמהם בגיגיות קודם המשכה ושמע ר' יעקב והקפיד ורצה לנדותם אם לא ישמעו וישובו ולא יעשו עוד כך

(f) Opinion: Rabeinu Yehudah also writes as follows. "One should be very stringent regarding the possibility that the wine is considered to start flowing. One who is stringent to put a sheet over the barrel and to fill the barrel and then (immediately) seal it should be blessed. Some wanted to find favor in the eyes of the Nochrim, and they would therefore let the Nochrim stomp on the grapes with them before wine was drawn. Rabeinu Yaakov heard about this and was upset, and wanted to put them in Niduy if they would not listen to him to stop this practice.

כי אולי אסרו לפי משנה אחרונה דריכה קודם המשכה אטו אחר המשכה אע"ג דלא גזרינן לקמן צייר לידיה אטו לא צייר לידיה וא"כ יש להחמיר שלא לדרוך עובד כוכבים יין ישראל כלל ועוד שמא ידרוך לאחר שיתחיל היין למשוך בגיגית עצמה לפי' רש"י

1. Opinion (cont.): This is because it is possible that Chazal forbade based on the Mishnah Acharonah for Nochrim to stomp on grapes before the wine started flowing as a decree, because of the fact that it is indeed forbidden to do so (according to the letter of the law) after the wine starts flowing. This is possible, despite the fact that we do not find that they decreed against doing so with a Nochri whose hands are tied up (so he cannot be Menasech) because it is forbidden according to the letter of the law to do so with a Nochri whose hands are not tied. If so, we should be stringent not to let a Nochri press the wine of a Jew at all. Additionally, it is possible that he might step on the grapes after the wine starts to flow in the barrel itself according to Rashi.

וכ"נ דברזא שעושין העובדי כוכבים בגיגית למשוך היין חשוב המשכה כמו גרגותני והקונה יין מגיתות העובדי כוכבים צריך ליזהר שלא תהא ברזא בגיגית

2. Opinion (cont.): It indeed seems that if a Nochri makes a spout in a barrel in order for the wine to flow, it is considered like the wine is flowing, just as if a filter basket is placed by the press. If someone buys wine from the presses of Nochrim, he must be careful that there should not be a spout on the barrel.

ודוקא ברזא קטנה אבל ברזא גדולה כעין פי חבית לא חשיב המשכה מאחר שהענבים נמשכים דרך שם עם היין

i. Opinion (cont.): This is specifically regarding a small spout. However, a big spout like that of the opening of the barrel is not considered flowing, being that the pieces of the grapes would go out that opening with the wine (and flowing is only when the wine is separated from the seeds and pits, as explained earlier).

8) TOSFOS DH AIN BOTZRIN

תוספות ד"ה אין בוצרין

(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why the Mishnah had to explicitly state that one does not press together with a Jew who is doing so when impure.)

פי' וה"ה עם ישראל שעושה פירותיו בטומאה

(a) Observation: This means that similarly one is not allowed to harvest together with a Jew who is harvesting his fruit when impure.

דאיכא תרתי דמסייע ידי עוברי עבירה ועוד שגורם הטומאה ולכך לא אצטריך למיתני נמי הא

1. Observation (cont.): There are two problems with this. One problem is that he is helping someone who is committing a sin. Additionally, he is causing it to become impure, which is why the Beraisa did not have to state this case (in addition to the case regarding the Nochri).

אבל קשיא למה צריך למיתני אין דורכין עם ישראל וכו' פשיטא השתא אין בוצרין עם העובד כוכבים דליכא אלא גרם טומאה דרבנן דריכה עם ישראל דאיכא סיוע טומאה דאורייתא לא כ"ש

(b) Question: However, this is difficult. Why did the Mishnah have to say that one does not step on grapes with a Jew etc. This is obvious! If one cannot harvest with a Nochri, even though he is only causing Rabbinic impurity, he certainly cannot do so with a Jew when he is helping cause impurity according to Torah law!

וי"ל דלפי מאי דפרישית דאיירי בסוף דריכה ניחא דאיצטריך לאשמועינן שאסור לסייע ידי עוברי עבירה אע"ג שכבר התחיל בעבירה

(c) Answer: Based on what we have explained, that the Mishnah is referring to the end of the pressing process, this is understandable. The Mishnah has to teach us that it is forbidden to help Jews who are sinning even though they already started their sin (and their sin is not dependent on his participation).

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES ON THIS DAF