יצרא דיין נסך לא תקיף להו זונה ישראלית ועובדי כוכבים מסובין חמרא אסור מ"ט הואיל וזילה עלייהו בתרייהו גרירא
but the passion for wine used for a libation does not overwhelm their judgment, and they will not allow her to use it for a libation. In the case of a Jewish prostitute and gentiles dining with her, the wine is forbidden. What is the reason? It is that since she is contemptible in their eyes, she is subjugated to them, and they use the wine for a libation without consideration for her.
ההוא ביתא דהוה יתיב ביה חמרא דישראל על עובד כוכבים אחדה לדשא באפיה והוה ביזעא בדשא אישתכח עובד כוכבים דקאי ביני דני אמר רבא כל דלהדי ביזעא שרי דהאי גיסא והאי גיסא אסור
§ The Gemara relates: There was an incident involving a certain house where Jews’ wine was stored. A gentile entered the house, and he locked the door before the Jew, but there was a crack in the door, and the gentile was found standing between the barrels. Rava said: All the barrels that were opposite the crack through which the gentile could be seen are permitted, because he would have been wary about being seen tampering with them. Barrels on this side and that side of the crack, where the gentile could not be seen, are forbidden, as perhaps the gentile used them for a libation.
ההוא חמרא דישראל דהוה יתיב בביתא דהוה דייר ישראל בעליונה ועובד כוכבים בתחתונה שמעו קל תיגרא נפקי קדים אתא עובד כוכבים אחדה לדשא באפיה אמר רבא חמרא שרי מימר אמר כי היכי דקדים אתאי אנא קדים ואתא ישראל ויתיב בעליונה וקא חזי לי
The Gemara relates: There was an incident involving a certain Jew’s wine that was stored in the lower story of a house, in which the Jew was living in the upper story and a gentile in the lower story, and the wine could be supervised from the upper story. One day the residents heard a sound of quarreling and went outside. The gentile came back in first and locked the door before the Jew. Rava said: The wine is permitted, because the gentile presumably said to himself: Just as I came back in early, perhaps my neighbor the Jew came back in early and is sitting in the upper story and watching me, and therefore he would not use the wine for a libation.
ההוא אושפיזא דהוה יתיב ביה חמרא דישראל אישתכח עובד כוכבים דהוה יתיב בי דני אמר רבא אם נתפס עליו כגנב שרי ואי לא אסיר
The Gemara relates: There was an incident involving a certain inn [ushpiza] where a Jew’s wine was stored, and a gentile was found sitting among the barrels. Rava said: If he was caught as a thief, i.e., if the gentile seemed startled and did not have a good explanation for being there, the wine is permitted, as the gentile was presumably afraid about being caught and would not have used it for a libation. But if not, the wine is forbidden.
ההוא ביתא דהוה יתיב ביה חמרא אישתכח עובד כוכבים דהוה קאים בי דני אמר רבא אי אית ליה לאישתמוטי חמרא אסיר ואי לא חמרא שרי מיתיבי ננעל הפונדק או שאמר לו שמור אסור מאי לאו אע"ג דלית ליה לאישתמוטי לא בדאית ליה לאישתמוטי
The Gemara relates: There was an incident involving a certain house where wine was stored. A gentile was found standing among the barrels. Rava said: If he has a way to excuse his entrance to where the wine was stored, the wine is forbidden, but if not, the wine is permitted. The Gemara raises an objection to this ruling from a baraita: If an inn was locked and a gentile was inside, or if the Jew said to the gentile: Safeguard my wine, the wine is forbidden. What, is it not forbidden even if the gentile does not have a way to excuse his entrance? The Gemara answers: No, the baraita is referring to a situation where he does have a way to excuse his entrance; otherwise the wine is permitted.
ההוא ישראל ועובד כוכבים דהוו יתיבי וקא שתו חמרא שמע ישראל קל צלויי בי כנישתא קם ואזל אמר רבא חמרא שרי מימר אמר השתא מדכר ליה לחמריה והדר אתי
The Gemara relates: There was an incident involving a certain Jew and a certain gentile who were sitting and drinking wine. The Jew heard the sound of praying at the synagogue. He got up and went to pray. Rava said: The wine is permitted, because the gentile presumably said to himself: Any moment now he will remember his wine and come back.
ההוא ישראל ועובד כוכבים דהוו יתיבי בארבא שמע ישראל קל שיפורי דבי שימשי נפק ואזל אמר רבא חמרא שרי מימר אמר השתא מדכר ליה לחמריה והדר אתי
The Gemara relates: There was an incident involving a certain Jew and a certain gentile who were sitting on a ship. The Jew heard the sound of the shofar of twilight indicating the beginning of Shabbat. He disembarked and went into town to spend Shabbat there. Rava said: The wine is permitted, because the gentile presumably said to himself: Any moment now he will remember his wine and come back.
ואי משום שבתא האמר רבא אמר לי איסור גיורא כי הוינן בארמיותן אמרינן יהודאי לא מנטרי שבתא דאי מנטרי שבתא כמה כיסי קא משתכחי בשוקא ולא ידענא דסבירא לן כרבי יצחק דא"ר יצחק המוצא כיס בשבת מוליכו פחות פחות מד' אמות
The Gemara comments: And if one might object that the gentile is presumably not concerned because he knows that the Jew will not return until the end of Shabbat, didn’t Rava say: Issur the Convert told me: When we were still gentiles, before converting, we used to say: Jews do not actually observe Shabbat, as, if they observe Shabbat, how many wallets would be found in the marketplace that the Jews could not take on Shabbat? And I did not know that we maintain that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yitzḥak, as Rabbi Yitzḥak says: One who finds a wallet on Shabbat may carry it in increments of less than four cubits. Evidently, gentiles assume that a Jew would violate Shabbat for monetary gain.
ההוא אריא דהוה נהים במעצרתא שמע עובד כוכבים טשא ביני דני אמר רבא חמרא שרי מימר אמר כי היכי דטשינא אנא איטשא נמי ישראל אחוריי וקא חזי לי
The Gemara relates: There was an incident involving a certain lion who roared in a winepress. A gentile heard the roar and was frightened, and he hid among the barrels of wine. Rava said: The wine is permitted, because the gentile presumably said to himself: Just as I am hiding, a Jew might also be hiding behind me and see me.
הנהו גנבי דסלקי לפומבדיתא ופתחו חביתא טובא אמר רבא חמרא שרי מ"ט רובא גנבי ישראל נינהו הוה עובדא בנהרדעי ואמר שמואל חמרא שרי
The Gemara relates: There was an incident involving certain thieves who came to Pumbedita and opened many barrels of wine. Rava said: The wine is permitted. What is the reason? Most of the thieves in Pumbedita are Jews, and the halakha follows the majority, and therefore the wine is not rendered forbidden. There was a similar incident in Neharde’a, and Shmuel said: The wine is permitted.
כמאן כרבי אליעזר דאמר ספק ביאה טהור
The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion is this? Perhaps it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, who says with regard to cases of uncertainty concerning ritual purity that if the uncertainty is with regard to a person’s entry into a certain place, he is deemed pure.
דתנן הנכנס לבקעה בימות הגשמים וטומאה בשדה פלונית ואמר הלכתי במקום הלז ואיני יודע אם נכנסתי לאותה שדה אם לא נכנסתי ר"א אומר ספק ביאה טהור ספק מגע טמא
This is as we learned in a mishna (Teharot 6:5): With regard to one who enters into a valley during the rainy season, i.e., winter, when people generally do not enter this area, and there was ritual impurity in such and such a field, and he said: I know I walked to that place, i.e., I walked in the valley, but I do not know whether I entered that field where the ritual impurity was or whether I did not enter, Rabbi Eliezer says: In a case of uncertainty with regard to entry, i.e., it is uncertain whether he entered the area where the ritual impurity is located, he is ritually pure. But if he certainly entered the area where the ritual impurity is located and the uncertainty pertains to contact with the source of ritual impurity, he is ritually impure. Apparently, the ruling of Shmuel, that in a case where it is uncertain whether gentile thieves entered the house at all the wine is permitted, is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer.
לא שאני התם כיון דאיכא דפתחי לשום ממונא הוה ליה ספק ספיקא
The Gemara rejects this: No, it is different there, with regard to the wine barrels. Since there are thieves who open barrels for the sake of perhaps finding money in them and are not interested in the wine, it is a case of compound uncertainty, as it is uncertain whether the thieves were gentiles or Jews, and even if they were gentiles, it is uncertain whether or not they touched the wine. In a case of compound uncertainty, everyone agrees that the wine is not forbidden.