Siman 136 said how to prevent a vessel from being compromised. Siman 137 takes up exactly
where it left off: the vessel is compromised, what should have been done was not, and kosher wine was
poured into it. Six seifim then answer one question in its several forms: how much did the wood
retain, and what suffices to nullify it? A vessel’s peel, six volumes of water, sixty volumes of
wine, twenty-four hours, twelve months — the siman is a chain of measures, and that is what makes it so
strikingly concrete.
Subject: Kosher wine put into a forbidden, unkashered vessel — אסור בשתייה ומותר בהנאה, קליפת הקנקן, כ״ד שעות, ס׳ Source: שולחן ערוך יורה דעה סימן קל״ז
Compiled by: הרב יוסף חיים סממה DAAT · daattorah.com
📑 Plan of study
1.The Mechaber’s text: the 6 seifim, with the Rama’s glosses
2.Background: the Mishnah of Avodah Zarah 29b, the sugya of beer (33b), the Rambam and the Tur
3.Key concepts: קליפת הקנקן, מכניסו לקיום, כ״ד שעות, טופח על מנת להטפיח, י״ב חדש, ברזא…
4.The table of measures: what is counted, and against what
5.The Shach, the Taz, the Ba’er Hetev and the Pitchei Teshuva
6.The Rama’s glosses (הגה): four interventions
7.Contemporary cases: the unkashered vat, the added water, the cask used for water
8.Summary and comprehension questions
1. The Mechaber’s text — the 6 seifim
The siman has six seifim, which is the count announced by the heading
(ובו ו׳ סעיפים). Seif 1 sets out the basic status and its three
measures of time; seif 2 deals with the winepress; seif 3, with wine
decanted into other jars; seif 4, with the vessel’s other uses; seif 5,
with a second filling; seif 6, with the word of a non-Jew.
Seif 1 — The status of the wine, and the three measures of time
דין יין כשר שהושם לתוך כלי שלא נכשר. ובו ו׳ סעיפים: כל הכלים האסורים מחמת יין של עובד כוכבים שהכניס בהם ישראל יין קודם שהכשירן אסור בשתייה ומותר בהנאה אפילו הוא יבש כל זמן שלא עבר עליו י״ב חדש (ואם הוא כלי שמכניסו לקיום אסור מיד) (טור בשם הרא״ש) ואם הוא כלי שאין מכניסו לקיום (והוא יבש) (ב״י) לא נאסר אא״כ עמד בו יינו של ישראל כ״ד שעות ואם היה ביין מעורב קיתון של מים אם יש במים ששה פעמים כנגד קליפת הקנקן מותר אפילו בשתייה: הגה ועיין לעיל סימן קל״ד דאפילו אין בו מים בטל בס׳ ואין חילוק בין בכלים האסורים משום יין נסך בין שהם בני יומן או לא (טור ותשובת הרא״ש והר״ף סוף עבודת כוכבים):
Title of the siman:the law of kosher wine placed into a vessel that was not kashered; and it contains six seifim.
All vessels forbidden on account of a non-Jew’s wine, into which a Jew introduced wine before kashering them — it is forbidden to drink and permitted for benefit, even if it is dry, so long as twelve months have not passed over it.
Rama’s gloss:and if it is a storage vessel — it is forbidden immediately (Tur in the name of the Rosh).
And if it is a vessel that is not for storage — Rama’s gloss:and it is dry (Beit Yosef) — it does not become forbidden unless the Jew’s wine stood in it twenty-four hours.
And if there was mixed with the wine a pitcher of water: if the water is six times the measure of the “peel” of the jar — it is permitted, even to drink.
Rama’s gloss:and see above, siman 134, that even if there is no water it is nullified in sixty; and there is no difference among vessels forbidden on account of yayin nesech whether they are “of their day” or not (Tur; responsum of the Rosh; and the Raf, end of Avodat Kokhavim).
Three measures of time, and they must never be confused.(1) Immediately — in a storage vessel (Rama).
(2) Twenty-four hours — in a vessel that is not for storage and is dry.
(3) Twelve months — beyond that, the vessel gives nothing back at all. These three
thresholds are not three opinions: they are three different physical situations, and the siman
distinguishes them carefully.
Seif 2 — The unkashered winepress, and the tap-hole
אם דרך ענבים בגת של עובד כוכבים שלא הכשירו מותר שהרי החרצנים והזגים יש בהם ס׳ כנגד קליפת הגת אבל אסור להוציא היין דרך נקב שהיין של עובד כוכבים יורד בו שהנקב אסור והיין היוצא משם צלול מבלי תערובות החרצנים: הגה ואם עבר והוציאו דרך הנקב נראה לפי מאי דקי״ל דסתם יינם בטל בס׳ כדלעיל סי׳ קל״ד דכאן ג״כ כל היין שרי ולא אמרינן דנאסר ראשון ראשון וע״ל סימן צ״ט:
If he trod grapes in a non-Jew’s winepress that he did not kasher — it is permitted, for the skins and pips contain sixty times the “peel” of the press. But it is forbidden to draw the wine out through the hole by which the non-Jew’s wine descends, for that hole is forbidden and the wine that comes out of it is clear, without any admixture of skins.
Rama’s gloss:and if he transgressed and drew it out through the hole: it appears that, according to what we hold — that stam yeinam is nullified in sixty, as above in siman 134 — here too all the wine is permitted, and we do not say that it became forbidden as it flowed; and see above, siman 99.
The winepress is permitted by what it contains, not by what it is. What saves it are the
skins and pips: they make bulk, and the absorbed peel of the press is nullified in them. Hence the
surprising consequence: as soon as one draws the wine clear through the hole, the bulk is gone, and
the argument falls with it.
Seif 3 — Wine decanted into other jars
יין שניתן לקנקנים של עובד כוכבים שלא הוכשרו ואחר כך הריק אותו יין ועירבו עם יין אחר מרובה שהיה לו בקנקנים אחרים כשרים אם יש ביין השני ס׳ כיין הראשון הכל מותר אפי׳ בשתייה ואם יש ביין השני מים כדי שיעור ששה חלקים כנגד קליפות האסורים ג״כ מותר הכל בשתייה ואע״פ שלא היה מים ביין הראשון:
Wine that was put into non-Jews’ jars that had not been kashered, and which he then poured out and mixed with other, more abundant wine that he had in other, kosher jars: if the second wine contains sixty times the first wine — all is permitted, even to drink. And if the second wine contains water to the measure of six parts against the forbidden “peels” — all is likewise permitted to drink, even though there was no water in the first wine.
Two paths of nullification, and they are not measured against the same thing. Against
the first wine, sixty is required — because it became forbidden to drink. Against the peels
themselves, six parts of water suffice — because water nullifies wine in six. The seif says expressly that
the second path works even if the first wine contained no water.
Seif 4 — Water, beer, other liquids, and salting
כלים האסורים מחמת יין של עובד כוכבים מותר ליתן לתוכם בין מים בין שכר בין שאר משקים ובלבד שידיח בתחלה לחלוחי היין שעל פני הכלים וכן מותר למלוח בהם:
Vessels forbidden on account of a non-Jew’s wine: it is permitted to put into them either water, or beer, or other liquids — provided one first rinses off the wine-moisture on the surface of the vessels; and it is likewise permitted to salt in them.
Wine spoils what is not wine. That is the reason the Tur gives:
לפי שהיין פוגם אותם. The absorbed taste of wine does not improve beer or water — it
spoils them — and a spoiling taste does not forbid. The condition the Mechaber sets is therefore not a
kashering: it is a simple rinsing of what remains on the surface.
Seif 5 — Wine a second time? Not without kashering
אם נתן יין בכלי אסור לא נתיר לתת בו יין פעם אחרת עד שיכשירנו:
If he put wine into a forbidden vessel, we will not permit putting wine into it a second time, until he kashers it.
Seif 6 — A non-Jew’s word about the kashering
אין עובד כוכבים מסיח לפי תומו נאמן בהכשר כלים האסורים (ועיין לעיל סימן קכ״ב כיצד נוהגין):
A non-Jew speaking innocently is not believed regarding the kashering of forbidden vessels. (And see above, siman 122, how we conduct ourselves.)
Seif 6 is not an incidental remark: it closes the siman like a door. All the preceding measures — six
volumes, sixty volumes, twenty-four hours, twelve months — presuppose that we know what happened.
The last seif says where that knowledge cannot come from.
2. Background — where each piece of the siman comes from
The basic status — forbidden to drink but permitted for benefit — comes from a Mishnah in Avodah Zarah,
and from a ma’hloket that the halakha decides against Rabbi Meir:
summary: the skins of the non-Jews and their jars, with a Jew’s wine enclosed in them — are forbidden, and their prohibition is a prohibition of benefit; these are the words of Rabbi Meir.
The Beit Yosef states at once which way the halakha leans, and why the Mechaber writes
ומותר בהנאה:
« בפרק אין מעמידין (עבודה זרה כט:) תנן נודות הנכרי וקנקניהם ויין של ישראל כנוס בהם אסורים ואיסורם איסור הנאה דר״מ וחכמים אומרים אין איסורם איסור הנאה וידוע דהלכה כחכמים » (בית יוסף יו״ד קל״ז)
summary: in the perek Ein Maamidin (Avodah Zarah 29b) we learned: the skins of the non-Jew and their jars, with a Jew’s wine enclosed in them, are forbidden, and their prohibition is a prohibition of benefit — the words of Rabbi Meir; and the Sages say: their prohibition is not a prohibition of benefit. And it is known that the halakha follows the Sages.
The Tur, whom the Mechaber follows closely, adds the measure of twenty-four hours in the name of the
Rosh, and expressly distinguishes it from a storage vessel:
« כל הכלים האסורין שנשתמש בו ישראל ביין עד שלא הכשירן כראוי אסור בשתייה ומותר בהנאה אפי׳ הוא יבש כ״ז שלא עבר עליו י״ב חדש » (טור יו״ד קל״ז)
« ומיהו כתב א״א ז״ל אם הוא כלי שאינו מכניסו לקיום לא נאסר אא״כ עומד בו יינו של ישראל כ״ד שעות » (טור יו״ד קל״ז)
summary: all forbidden vessels in which a Jew used wine before kashering them properly — it is forbidden to drink and permitted for benefit, even if it is dry, so long as twelve months have not passed. However, my father the Rosh wrote: if it is a vessel that is not for storage, it does not become forbidden unless the Jew’s wine stood in it twenty-four hours.
And the Beit Yosef gives the physical reason, in the name of the Rosh — this is the reason for the
twenty-four hours:
« ומיהו כתב א״א הרא״ש ז״ל אם הוא כלי שאין מכניסו לקיום לא נאסר אא״כ עומד בו יינו של ישראל כ״ד שעות כ״כ בפרק אין מעמידין ונתן טעם משום דצונן בצונן פולט או בולע במע״ל » (בית יוסף יו״ד קל״ז)
The permission of seif 4 comes from another sugya in the same perek, where it is concluded that one may
put beer into the jars:
summary: they asked: what of putting beer into it? Rav Nachman and Rav Yehuda forbid, and Rava permits. Ravina permitted Rav Chiya son of Rav Yitzchak to pour beer into it; he went and poured wine into it, and even so he was not concerned about the matter: he said — it is merely occasional.
The Rambam had already settled both points, two halakhot apart: the twelve-month ageing, then the
permission of beer and brine:
summary: the skins of the non-Jews and their jars, into which they have put their wine — it is forbidden to put wine into them until one ages them twelve months. — And it is permitted to put beer, brine or muryas into them immediately, with nothing else required; and it is permitted to put the wine into them after putting in the brine or the muryas, for the salt burns them.
Why is the wine permitted for benefit? Because the halakha follows the Sages against Rabbi Meir — and because what mixed in is not wine in substance, but what the vessel gave back.
Why twenty-four hours? Because cold in cold gives out and absorbs in a full day: it is a physical measure, not a conventional figure.
Why twelve months? Because beyond that the vessel is dry in the strong sense: it has nothing left to give back.
Why is beer permitted and wine not? Because the taste of wine spoils beer, and a spoiling taste does not forbid.
3. Key concepts of this siman
אָסוּר בִּשְׁתִיָּיה וּמוּתָּר בַּהֲנָאָה — forbidden to drink, permitted
for benefit. The basic status of seif 1. The wine may not be drunk, but it may be sold or otherwise
used. This is the position of the Sages against Rabbi Meir, and the Beit Yosef notes it expressly.
קְלִיפַּת הַקַּנְקַן — the “peel” of the jar. The thickness of
wood that actually absorbed wine. The Shach gives its concrete measure: what would come off if the wood were
planed. It is against that thickness, and not against the whole vessel, that one measures.
מַכְנִיסוֹ לְקִיּוּם — a storage vessel. One in which wine is
kept over time. The Rama draws from it the harshest consequence in the seif: there the wine is forbidden
immediately, without waiting twenty-four hours.
כ״ד שָׁעוֹת — twenty-four hours. The threshold for a vessel that
is not for storage. The reason, given by the Rosh, is physical:
צונן בצונן פולט ובולע במעת לעת — cold in cold gives out and absorbs in a full day.
יָבֵשׁ · טוֹפֵחַ עַל מְנָת לְהַטְפִּיחַ —
dry · wet enough to wet. Two states, two regimes. Dry, the vessel gives back only by
absorption, and the time thresholds apply. If enough moisture remains on it to wet the hand, it is no longer
absorption: it is wine in substance, and it forbids what mixes with it.
י״ב חֹדֶשׁ — twelve months. The upper limit. Past that period,
the vessel is deemed to have nothing left to give back. The Rambam lists it as one of the ways of making the
jars usable.
חַרְצַנִּים וְזַגִּים — the skins and pips. What remains of
trodden grapes. They are not wine: they therefore form a mass of another kind, and it is through them that
the unkashered press becomes permitted in seif 2.
נֶקֶב הַבְּרָזָא — the tap-hole. The point through which the
wine comes out. It too has absorbed; and since the wine that emerges from it is clear, it does not carry
along the mass that would nullify it. It is the one part of the press that seif 2 forbids.
נוֹתֵן טַעַם לִפְגָם — a spoiling taste. An absorbed taste that
degrades rather than improves does not forbid. This is the reason of seif 4 for water, beer and other
liquids — and it is exactly what the Shach refuses to apply to wine itself.
מֵסִיחַ לְפִי תּוּמּוֹ — speaking innocently. A non-Jew who
reports a fact without knowing that a question depends on it is sometimes believed for a rabbinic
prohibition. Seif 6 rules it out here, and the Shach gives the reason:
איתחזק איסורא — the prohibition is established.
4. The table of measures
The whole siman reduces to two columns: what is counted, and
against what.
Situation
The threshold
Against what
Storage vessel (Rama)
אסור מיד
No delay is required
Non-storage vessel, dry
כ״ד שעות
צונן בצונן פולט ובולע במעת לעת
Beyond twelve months
י״ב חדש
The vessel gives nothing back
Water mixed with the wine (seif 1)
ששה פעמים
כנגד קליפת הקנקן
The trodden press (seif 2)
ס׳
כנגד קליפת הגת
The second wine (seif 3)
ס׳
Against the first wine
Water in the second wine (seif 3)
ששה חלקים
כנגד קליפות האסורים
Other liquids, salting (seif 4)
מותר
After rinsing the surface
Wine a second time (seif 5)
עד שיכשירנו
No measure dispenses with it
Read the middle column: six, sixty, twenty-four hours, twelve months. The siman never
reasons in all-or-nothing — it reasons in quantities. That is what makes it applicable, and it is
also what requires knowing, each time, against what one is counting.
5. The Shach, the Taz, the Ba’er Hetev and the Pitchei Teshuva
The apparatus of this siman is ample: 19 ס״ק in the Shach, 8 in the Taz,
10 in the Ba’er Hetev, 3 in the Pitchei Teshuva. Here are the entries that
govern the reading.
The Shach
ס״ק ג — why the absorbed wine forbids in the least quantity, and yet only for drinking
« שאני הכא דקודם שנבלע בכלי היה אסור בהנאה נמצא כשמתערב ביין שבקנקנים איסור הנאה מתערב אלא שלפי שלא נתערב בעין רק מפליטת הכלי אינו אוסר רק בשתייה » (ש״ך יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק ג)
summary: here it is different, for before being absorbed into the vessel it was forbidden for benefit; it turns out, then, that when it mixes with the wine in the jars, a prohibition of benefit is mixing in. Only, since it did not mix in substance but only through what the vessel gave back, it forbids only for drinking.
summary: because cold in cold gives out and absorbs in a full day. So the Rosh.
ס״ק ט — how much did the vessel absorb?
« שאין היין נבלע אלא כדי קליפה שמקלפים העץ ברהיטני (כדלעיל סי׳ קל״ה סי״ג) רשב״א ומביאו ב״י וריב״ש סי׳ קל״ג » (ש״ך יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק ט)
« מיהו כתב הב״ח דלר״ת והרא״ש בכלי שמכניסו לקיום בולע יותר מכדי קליפה וצריך ס׳ כנגד כולו ע״כ » (ש״ך יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק ט)
summary: wine is absorbed only to the thickness of a peel — the one removed by planing the wood; so the Rashba, cited by the Beit Yosef, and the Rivash. However, the Bach wrote that according to Rabbenu Tam and the Rosh, in a storage vessel it absorbs more than a peel, and sixty is required against the whole vessel.
This is the most consequential ma’hloket in the siman, because it changes the order of magnitude of the
calculation: a peel, or the whole vessel. The Shach adds a distinction that decides the matter in practice —
if one knows that the wine stood there twenty-four hours, the vessel counts as pickled, and the
peel argument no longer holds.
« אבל בידוע שעמד בו מעל״ע הרי נעשה כבוש וכבר נתבאר בסימן ס״ט ס״ק ס׳ ובסימן צ״ח ס״ק י״ג דכבישה אוסר כל הכלי » (ש״ך יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק ט)
ס״ק י — why the vessel’s age saves nothing
« דאפילו אינן ב״י אוסרים דלא שייך נטל״פ אלא בתבשיל אבל לא בכלי היין דאדרבה כל שמתיישנים נ״ט לשבח » (ש״ך יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק י)
summary: even if they are not “of their day” they forbid, for a spoiling taste applies only to a cooked dish and not to a wine vessel — on the contrary: whatever ages there gives an improving taste.
ס״ק ט״ז — other liquids: occasionally, not regularly
« ולא גזרי׳ משקין אטו יין משום דאקראי בעלמא הוא ש״ס ולפ״ז אסור ליתן בהם משקין דרך קבע » (ש״ך יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק ט״ז)
summary: and we do not decree on liquids because of wine, since it is only an occasional matter — so the Gemara; and accordingly it is forbidden to put liquids into them on a regular basis.
ס״ק י״ט — why the non-Jew is not believed here
« י״ל דהתם מיירי בדבר דלא אתחזק איסורא משא״כ הכא דודאי נשתמש בכלים אלו יין של איסור » (ש״ך יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק י״ט)
summary: one may say that there it concerns a matter where no prohibition has been established, unlike here, where it is certain that forbidden wine was used in these vessels.
The Taz
ס״ק ב and ס״ק ג — the two thresholds, in two lines
« דגזרו עליו אפילו לפי שעה » (ט״ז יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק ב)
« דצונן לא מפליט בפחות מזה » (ט״ז יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק ג)
summary: “forbidden immediately” — because they decreed concerning it even for a short while. “Twenty-four hours” — because cold does not give out in less than that.
ס״ק ד — the tap-hole, and the prohibition of nullifying a priori
« בב״י כתוב דזה דוקא אם ההיתר בא מחמת החרצנים והזגים לפיכך נאסר היין דרך הנקב וצריך שיעשה נקב חדש או יוציא היין מלמעלה » (ט״ז יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק ד)
« ולי נראה דדברי ב״י נכונים דאע״ג דמצינו סברא זו דאין הכוונה לבטל האיסור בסי׳ פ״ד סעיף י״ג גבי נמלים שבדבש שמותר לסננו וכן בתולעים שבחטים ולא הוי מבטל לכתחלה שאני התם דא״א בענין אחר משא״כ כאן דאפשר לעשות נקב חדש או להוציא דרך פיו למעלה כל שמוציאו בדרך שיש בו חשש איסור מקרי לכתחלה ואסור לעשות כן » (ט״ז יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק ד)
summary: and it appears to me that the Beit Yosef’s words are correct: although we find this reasoning — that the intention is not to nullify the prohibition — in siman 84, seif 13, concerning ants in honey that one may filter, there it is different, for there is no other way; whereas here one can make a new hole or draw the wine out from above. Therefore, drawing the wine in a manner that carries a suspicion of prohibition is called acting a priori, and it is forbidden to do so.
ס״ק ז — other liquids, even for a long time
« נ״ל פשוט אפילו אם המשקין נשתהים שם מעל״ע מותר דהא הטור כתב הטעם כיון שהיין פוגם אותם ואע״ג דבשאר דוכתי קיימא לן נותן טעם לפגם אסור לכתחלה שאני הכא דנבלע בצונן » (ט״ז יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק ז)
summary: it seems plain to me that even if the liquids remain there a full day it is permitted; for the Tur gave the reason — the wine spoils them. And although elsewhere we hold that a spoiling taste is forbidden a priori, here it is different, since the absorption took place cold.
The Ba’er Hetev
ס״ק ב — the Shach–Taz disagreement, set out plainly
« אבל הט״ז פסק דלדידן דס״ל דסתם יינם בטל בס׳ אין כאן איסור בדיעבד ואף על פי דמדברי רמ״א בסי׳ קל״ה סי״א משמע שאסור בדיעבד מ״מ הסומך על דברי המקילין במידי דרבנן לא הפסיד. עכ״ל » (באר היטב יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק ב)
summary: but the Taz ruled that, according to us who hold that stam yeinam is nullified in sixty, there is no prohibition here after the fact; and although it emerges from the Rama’s words in siman 135 seif 11 that it is forbidden after the fact, at all events one who relies on the lenient opinions in a rabbinic matter loses nothing.
ס״ק ו — the Nekudot HaKesef’s objection to the Taz
« ובנה״כ השיג עליו וכי דודאי צריך ביין הא׳ לחודיה ס׳ דאל״כ היין הא׳ נ״נ וצריך אחר כך ביין הב׳ ס׳ נגד כל היין הא׳ דע״כ לא ס״ל גבי יין ביין דלא נ״נ אלא מטעם דכיון דנאסר במשהו משא״כ היכא דנאסר מחמת שלא היה בו ס׳ והכי קי״ל לעיל סימן צ״ב ס״ד דאף לח בלח נ״נ אם לא במקום הפסד גדול עכ״ל » (באר היטב יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק ו)
summary: and in the Nekudot HaKesef he objected to him that sixty is certainly required against the first wine on its own, for otherwise the first wine itself becomes forbidden, and sixty will then be required in the second wine against all of the first.
ס״ק ח — salting, and the Bach’s refusal
« והב״ח חולק על זה ופסק דלכתחלה אסור למלוח כדלעיל סימן ק״ה סי״ב וגם בדיעבד אסור אם נכבש בתוכו יום שלם אבל הש״ך השיג עליו דמסתמא יש ס׳ נגד פליטת הכלי שלא בלע רק כ״ק ויין נקלש טעמו בשאר משקין וכ״ש במליח וכן פסק הט״ז דהעיקר כדעת המחבר דמותר אפילו לכתחלה למלוח בהן » (באר היטב יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק ח)
summary: and the Bach disputes this and rules that a priori it is forbidden to salt, as above in siman 105 seif 12, and that after the fact too it is forbidden if it lay pickled therein a whole day. But the Shach refuted him: ordinarily there is sixty against what the vessel gives back, since it absorbed only a peel; and the taste of wine is weakened in other liquids, all the more so in salted food. And so the Taz ruled: the main view is that of the Mechaber — it is permitted to salt in them, even a priori.
The Pitchei Teshuva
On this siman the Pitchei Teshuva has three entries, and they all bear on the measure and on the
materials.
« ועי׳ בתשובת ח״צ סימן ע״ה שמתיר בכל ענין דאין אוסר יותר מכדי קליפה » (פתחי תשובה יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק א)
summary: and see the responsum of the Chacham Tzvi, siman 75, who permits in any case, since it does not forbid beyond a peel’s worth.
« ועיין בתשובת שב יעקב סימן ל״ג שכתב דזה דוקא בכלי עץ או חרס אבל בכלי מתכות אף יין נפגם ע״ש » (פתחי תשובה יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק ב)
summary: and see the responsum of the Shev Yaakov, siman 33, who wrote that this applies only to a vessel of wood or earthenware; but in a metal vessel even wine is spoiled.
6. The Rama’s glosses
On seif 1 — the storage vessel
The Mechaber drew no distinction; the Rama does, in the name of the Tur citing the Rosh:
ואם הוא כלי שמכניסו לקיום אסור מיד. It is the weightiest clause of the seif, and
the Shach gives its source in the Tur itself:
« דכי היכי שנאסר הכלי ע״י עובד כוכבים אפילו לא הכניס בו יין אלא לפי שעה ה״נ נאסר בו יינו של ישראל אפילו לפי שעה. טור » (ש״ך יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק ב)
summary: just as the vessel was rendered forbidden by the non-Jew even if he put wine into it only for a short while, so too the Jew’s wine becomes forbidden in it even for a short while. So the Tur.
On seif 1 — “and it is dry”
Two words added in the name of the Beit Yosef, and they change everything: the twenty-four-hour measure
holds only for a dry vessel. The Shach spells out the other case:
« אבל אם היה בו טופח על מנת להטפיח אוסר המתערב עמו כדלעיל סי׳ קכ״ו ב״י » (ש״ך יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק ד)
summary: but if there was on it enough to wet so as to wet something else, it forbids what mixes with it, as above in siman 126. Beit Yosef.
On seif 1 — nullification in sixty, and the vessel’s age
The Rama refers to siman 134: even without water, stam yeinam is nullified in sixty. And he closes a door
one would be tempted to open — the argument from the vessel’s age does not hold here, as the Shach explained
at ס״ק י.
On seif 2 — wine drawn through the hole, after the fact
The Mechaber forbids drawing the wine through the hole; the Rama adds that if it was done, all the wine
remains permitted, and we do not say נאסר ראשון ראשון. The Shach gives the
underlying reason:
« אלא הטעם הוא דהקליפה של הנקב בטל בס׳ דמה שיוצא דרך הנקב יש לעולם ס׳ נגד הקליפה דהא הרשב״א והטור גופיה לא אסרי אלא משום שהיין יוצא שם צלול ונאסר בכל שהוא אבל אם היה יוצא שם עם החרצנים וזגים היו מתירי׳ משום שיש ס׳ נגד קליפת הנקב וא״כ לדידן דקי״ל דסתם יינם בטל בס׳ אם כן בכל ענין שרי וזה ברור » (ש״ך יו״ד קל״ז ס״ק י״א)
The Rama’s glosses all run the same way: they tighten where the physics requires it (the storage
vessel, the moisture) and they ease where quantity permits it (sixty, the accomplished fact). It is
the same logic as the Mechaber’s, applied with the categories of siman 134.
7. Contemporary cases
Case 1 — A vat that was not kashered
This is seif 1. Three questions, in order: (1) is it a storage vessel? — if so, the wine is
affected immediately (Rama). (2) If not, was it dry, and did the wine stand in it
twenty-four hours? (3) Have twelve months elapsed since the last forbidden use? The status,
in every case where it is affected, is אסור בשתייה ומותר בהנאה.
Case 2 — Water added to the wine
Seif 1 permits even for drinking when the water is six times the vessel’s peel. But the Shach (ס״ק ו) recalls
the limit: this holds only where one did not intend to nullify the prohibition. Adding water
afterwards with the intent to nullify is precisely what the rule
אין מבטלין איסור לכתחלה forbids — whereas adding it in advance, as a precaution, is
permitted.
Case 3 — The cask that will only ever hold water
Seif 4 permits it, after a simple rinsing of the surface. Two practical qualifications: the Shach (ס״ק ט״ז)
forbids regular use — the permission is for the occasional; and the Taz (ס״ק ז) permits it even if
the liquid remains a full day.
Case 4 — The press and the draw-off valve
Seif 2 permits treading in an unkashered press but forbids drawing the wine through the usual outlet. The Taz
(ס״ק ד) draws the practical conduct from this: where one can make another passage or draw off from
above, one must do so, since drawing through the valve would be nullifying the prohibition a priori. The
Shach (ס״ק ז), following the Bach, is more lenient: since the intention is not to nullify but to draw off,
this is not a case of מבטל איסור לכתחלה.
Case 5 — “The supplier says the vat was kashered”
This is seif 6, and it is categorical: the word of a non-Jew, even incidental, does not establish the
kashering of a vessel. The Shach (ס״ק י״ט) explains why this does not contradict the cases where a non-Jew
speaking innocently is believed: here, the prohibition is established
(איתחזק איסורא). The siman refers to siman 122 for the practical conduct.
8. Summary of Siman 137
In one sentence: this siman does not ask whether the vessel is forbidden — it is — but
how much it gives back, and against what that is measured; and all its answers are
quantities.
Memory table
What the siman says
In Hebrew
To remember
The status of the wine poured in
אסור בשתייה ומותר בהנאה
Drinking no, benefit yes
Storage vessel
אסור מיד
No delay protects
Ordinary vessel, dry
כ״ד שעות
Cold in cold: a full day
The upper limit
י״ב חדש
Beyond it the vessel gives nothing back
What is measured
קליפת הקנקן
A peel, not the whole vessel
The water
ששה פעמים
Six volumes against the peel
The winepress
החרצנים והזגים יש בהם ס׳
The bulk of the skins nullifies
The tap-hole
היין היוצא משם צלול
Without the bulk, nullification fails
Other liquids
מותר ליתן לתוכם
After rinsing, and not as regular use
The non-Jew’s word
אין עובד כוכבים מסיח לפי תומו נאמן
The prohibition is established
Comprehension questions
Why is the wine poured in forbidden to drink but permitted for benefit? Which phrase of the Shach explains it?
Three time thresholds coexist in seif 1. Which are they, and to what physical situation does each answer?
Against what are the six parts of water measured? And why does the Shach (ס״ק ט) refuse this calculation when it is known that the wine stood there a full day?
Seif 2 permits the press and forbids the hole. What is the one difference between them?
Why is beer permitted in a vessel where wine is forbidden — and how far does that permission go according to the Shach and according to the Taz?
Going further
If you wish to go deeper into this siman:
📚 Level 2 — Lamdan: במשהו or בס׳, the measure of absorption between the Rashba and Rabbenu Tam, the vessel that was not rinsed (Shach against Taz), the valve and מבטל איסור לכתחלה, and the Nekudot HaKesef’s objection
✨ Level 3 — Synthesis: the tables of measures, the golden rules, the mnemonic and the classic pitfalls
⚖️ Level 4 — Halakha lema‘asse: the practical ruling (Shach, Taz, Ba’er Hetev, Pitchei Teshuva) and contemporary cases
The sources of this level may be consulted on Sefaria:
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ DAAT · הרב יוסף חיים סממה
תלמיד חכם · מעביר שיעורים בהלכה ובחסידות סימן קל״ז · Level 1 — Introduction · דין יין כשר שהושם לתוך כלי שלא נכשר daattorah.com