Rav Ashi replied: There, the mishna is referring to a case where the barrel is not actually thrown. Rather, it is propelled by the gentile, and again propelled by him, until it reaches the vat. Therefore, if the gentile did so not in anger, there is reason to be concerned that he might have touched the wine. התם דקאזיל מיניה ומיניה:
MISHNA: In the case of a Jew who renders the wine of a gentile permitted by treading the gentile’s grapes so that the wine can be sold to Jews, and although a Jew has not yet paid for the wine he then places the wine in the gentile’s domain in a house that is open to a public thoroughfare until he sells it, the halakha depends on the circumstances. If this occurs in a city in which there are both gentiles and Jews, the wine is permitted, as the gentile does not touch the wine lest the Jews see him doing so. If this occurs in a city in which all its inhabitants are gentiles, the wine is prohibited unless a Jew sits and safeguards the wine. מתני׳ המטהר יינו של עובד כוכבים ונותנו ברשותו (ו)בבית הפתוח לרשות הרבים בעיר שיש בה עובדי כוכבים וישראלים מותר בעיר שכולה עובדי כוכבים אסור עד שישב ומשמר
But the watchman is not required to sit and guard the wine constantly; even if he frequently leaves the place and comes in again later, the wine is permitted. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: The domain of gentiles is all one, as the Gemara will explain. ואין השומר צריך להיות יושב ומשמר אע"פ שהוא יוצא ונכנס מותר ר"ש בן אלעזר אומר רשות עובדי כוכבים אחת היא:
In the case of a Jew who renders the wine of a gentile permitted by treading the gentile’s grapes so that the wine can be sold to Jews, and he then places the wine in the gentile’s domain until he sells it, the halakha depends on the circumstances. If that one, the gentile, writes for the Jew: I received money from you in payment for the wine, even though he did not yet receive the actual payment, the wine is permitted. This is because the wine is considered the Jew’s property and the gentile does not venture to touch it. But if the Jew desires to remove the wine and the gentile does not allow him to do so until the Jew gives him the money due to him, this was an incident that occurred in Beit She’an and the Sages deemed the wine prohibited. In this case the gentile believes that he has a lien upon the wine, and therefore he has no compunctions about touching it. המטהר יינו של עובד כוכבים ונותנו ברשותו והלה כותב לו התקבלתי ממך מעות מותר אבל אם ירצה ישראל להוציא ואינו מניחו עד שיתן לו את מעותיו זה היה מעשה בבית שאן ואסרו:
GEMARA: The Gemara questions the mishna’s distinction between a city with Jewish inhabitants and a city without Jewish inhabitants: The wine should also be permitted in a city in which all its inhabitants are gentiles, as aren’t there Jewish peddlers who travel around the various towns? Consequently, the gentile refrains from touching the wine, lest the Jewish peddlers see him touching it. Shmuel says: The mishna is referring to a city that has double doors and a crossbar, and the residents know when outsiders enter the city. גמ׳ בעיר שכולה עובדי כוכבים נמי והאיכא רוכלין המחזירין בעיירות אמר שמואל בעיר שיש לה דלתים ובריח

Koren Talmud Bavli (Steinsaltz Center)

The Koren Talmud Bavli is a groundbreaking edition of the Talmud that fuses the innovative design of Koren Publishers Jerusalem with the incomparable scholarship of Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz.

Buy Now More Info
With regard to the mishna’s statement that the wine is permitted only if the gentile’s house is open to a public thoroughfare, Rav Yosef says: And if a Jew’s window is open to that place it is considered like a public thoroughfare. And similarly, a trash heap is considered like a public thoroughfare as many people frequent it, and a palm tree is considered like a public thoroughfare, as the gentile is concerned lest someone climbing the palm tree see him. אמר רב יוסף וחלון כרה"ר דמי ואשפה כרה"ר דמי ודיקלא כרה"ר דמי
With regard to a case where the top of the palm tree was cut off, Rav Aḥa and Ravina disagree: One of them deems the wine prohibited and one of them deems it permitted. The Gemara explains: The one who deems the wine prohibited holds that since no fruit grows on the palm tree, why would someone climb up there? The gentile therefore has no reason for concern lest someone see him, and he has no compunctions about touching the wine. And the one who deems the wine permitted holds that it happens on occasion that someone loses an animal and he climbs up the palm tree to look for it. The gentile is therefore concerned lest someone climbing the palm tree see him, and he does not touch the wine. פסיק רישיה פליגי בה רב אחא ורבינא חד אסר וחד שרי מאן דאסר למה ליה דסליק התם ומאן דשרי זימנא דאבדה ליה בהמה וסליק לעיוני בתרה:
§ The Sages taught: In the case of a Jew who purchases a house or one who rents a house in a gentile’s courtyard, and a Jew filled the house with barrels of wine, if another Jew dwells in the same courtyard, the wine is permitted. This halakha applies even if that Jew does not have in his possession the key to the house or a seal on the barrels of wine. ת"ר אחד הלוקח ואחד השוכר בית בחצירו של עובד כוכבים ומילאהו יין וישראל דר באותה חצר מותר ואף על פי שאין מפתח וחותם בידו