According to one opinion, if there is no expert, it is sufficient if the seller says that he himself prepared the entrails and roe by salting them. But another opinion rules more strictly. The seller must show the fish from which the roe and entrails came. Otherwise, we cannot assume that they are kosher.
Today’s sugya explains the remainder of the mishnah.
The stalk of the hiltit plant cannot be bought from a non-Jew because he might have used a knife with non-kosher fat on it to cut it. But we should have no such concern with the leaf— the leaf was not even cut!
The answer is that we need to know that the leaf is kosher even if it has some slivers on it. We might have been concerned that the slivers come from the sliced stalk. The mishnah teaches that these slivers came onto the leaf when it was detached from the ground, and not when the stalk was cut.
We might have thought that very soft olive cakes have wine in them, and therefore should not be bought from a non-Jew. Therefore the mishnah teaches that it is the olive oil that makes them soft, not added wine. They may be eaten even when purchased from a non-Jew.
An olive that is very soft may have been softened with wine, and therefore R. Yose says it is prohibited.
The final sugya of this chapter (!) explains the last few clauses of the mishnah.
The issue in this baraita is whether we are concerned lest the shopkeeper mixes wine in with his wares. We learn that he does so only with wares that are ready to sell. If the products are sold from storage, they are permitted.
Not only is the apple cider permitted, but it cures bowel disorders. Indeed, a search on google yields that there is truth to this, at least if it is apple cider vinegar.
Priests were occasionally suspected of selling terumah as if it was non-sacred food, which carries a higher price. It is prohibited to buy produce from such a priest, but only from the basket that is in front of him. He might mix terumah into this basket. But he will not mix terumah and non-sacred produce in his warehouse lest the rabbis find out and declare that his whole warehouse is prohibited. This would be too big of a loss. Therefore one can buy food from his warehouse.
May we return to you chapter “One may not place”
According to Deuteronomy 7:25-26 it is forbidden for a Jew to derive any benefit from idolatrous images. The first mishnah in chapter three defines which images made by non-Jews are idolatrous and therefore forbidden and which are made merely as adornments, and are therefore permitted.
The Rabbis in this mishnah dispute which images (sculptures) made by non-Jews are prohibited, because they may be used for idolatrous purposes. According to Rabbi Meir, all images are prohibited because they are worshipped once a year. The Sages dispute with Rabbi Meir. They hold that only the images that have in their hands a staff, bird or orb are forbidden. An image that holds one of these items, which probably was a symbol of power, was certainly made for idolatry. However, although some other images may have been made for idolatrous purposes, we are not sure if they were. Therefore we are not strict with regards to them, and they are permitted. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel basically agrees with the Sages that an image about which there is a doubt if it is idolatrous, is permitted. However, Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel adds that any image that has something in its hand is idolatrous, and is therefore forbidden.
In the mishnah R. Meir said that all images are prohibited because they are worshipped once a year. But if they are worshipped once a year, then they are idols, and why would the rabbis permit Jews to use them?
The Talmud explains that if the idol is actually worshipped once a year, then all sages would agree that it is prohibited. The issue is whether all images, everywhere, are prohibited, because a minority of idols are worshipped once a year. R. Meir holds that we should be “concerned about a minority” and therefore even though only a minority of images are worshipped, all are prohibited. But the other sages say that we follow the majority.
According to Shmuel the mishnah refers to royal statues made when the king dies. R. Meir holds that people worship these images, whereas the other rabbis think that they do not. R. Yohanan says that the mishnah refers to images that stand at the entrance of the city. Again, R. Meir holds that people worship these images, whereas the rabbis hold that they do not.
In other words, according to both of these statements, if the images were certainly worshipped, even once a year, all would agree that they are prohibited. The question is whether they are worshipped even once a year.