Talking Talmud

When wine is in an idolater's domain, in a home that opens to the public domain, when is that wine permitted? And if it's in a Jew's domain? But what if the city were entirely idolaters? Also, if a Jew lives in a house in a courtyard owned by a non-Jew, then is that in considered usable or not? Plus, the story of the house of the vizier, and the concerns of sharecroppers how may or may not be messing with the Jews' wine. But if they're messing with the wine, they're unlikely to have the presence of mind to offer libations in the mix of everything else.

An idolater who crushes grapes via a press, but it's still potentially libation. But that's indirect.... and indeed, the wine is prohibited, but there's more room to maneuver than initially believed... Others are more comfortable for one to sell the wine - since it's not prohibited for benefit. Plus, the case of a non-Jew standing next to a vat of wine. And what happens if he indeed falls in?

Rabbi Hiya bar Aba was in a place called Gavla - which place that is specifically is unclear, though suggestions are made - where he saw Jewish young women who were impregnated by men who were in the process of converting to Judaism. Also re their wine. Likewise, he saw Jews eating from bishul akum. He said nothing, but consulted with Rabbi Yochanan later, and he said that the babies must be proclaimed mamzerim, the wine - yein nesach, and so on. Because this population was just not that knowledgeable. Also, how does someone whose wine has become prohibited via a non-Jew's libation, how can that Jew recoup the loss? Isn't that wine prohibited from benefit? That turns out to be a matter of dispute.

An incident took place in Mehoza - a non-Jew asked a Jew if he has wine to sell. After he is told no, he shoves his hand into a barrel of wine and mixes it and asks: Isn't this wine? -- what now is the status of that wine? Note the shofar-blowing to announce the issuance of a "p'sak din" - halakhic decision. To what extent has libation been involved in this kind of case? Moreover, note the different practices and the different levels of knowledge in various places - from Mehoza and Nehardea, and more. (All the cases brought in an attempt to refute Rava) Also, some of the sages were drinking wine, and the invite someone who later was determined to be a non-Jew. Other beverages, including beer, would have a different concerns (or none, as the case may be). If one sees wine, why would they suggest it was beer (maybe it's at night?). Also, note the difference between bishul akum, for example, and the issues here, which are from the Torah, and more concerned about idolatry than fraternizing.

Several stories - indicating that the concern about libation wine was real for them. For example, a person's lulav touching his wine. Or the extreme case of an infant touching the wine (as an example of intent not being the more key element here in declaring wine for libations. Plus, conversions with circumcision and dunking in a mikveh. Plus, the impurity factor, given that status. Note the stringency here, especially given the biblical prohibition. Also, a greater concern that converts who have completed the process are still subject to their original beliefs... or a year or so. Plus, concerns about taint of partial converts with regard to the wine.

First, why "libation wine" is a topic that draws so much attention. Wine cannot become "libation" wine until it goes into the cistern - is it fully processed then? That is a matter of dispute. Also, a 6-year-old child who was an outstanding scholar of this very tractate - Avodah Zarah. He was able to field serious questions about Jews and non-Jews working together to tread on grapes to make wine. Plus, long-term deliberations over concerns about wine, without real worrying about keeping people waiting for an answer...

Agrippas, the Roman general, asked Rabban Gamliel (paraphrase): Your God is a jealous God, but people are only jealous of those who are in real competition, so how can He be jealous of idols, which are fundamentally nothing? Plus, an example of a man who takes a second wife, and when that will make the first wife feel bad (in analogy to God vs. idolatry). Also, a challenge from people who are seemingly healed by idols. Plus, the perfect timing of suffering that can then confuse bystanders. Also, a focus on wine-making and taking the juice out of the grape - when does it become wine? (for halakhic concerns). Plus, draining the grapes and the implications as compared to juice flowing easily.

R. Dimi came from the land of Israel to Babylonia and taught how the land itself isn't rendered prohibited by virtue of people bowing down, but working/digging, etc. just might. The same for other items too. What about exchanging one thing for the thing that was worshipped? Still a problem, but the exchange of an exchange is a machloket. NOTE: A switch to discussion of libations and Aggadah in the mishnah (unusual, as we know). Does God really mind idolatry? He allows it, after all.... Also, a discussion between the philosophers in Rome (literally) and the sages on how God does not interfere in the running of the world, according to its natural order. But that means people do things against God's will and thrive nonetheless! (To wit, Rome).

Several mishnayot - beginning with nullifying an idol (on the bottom of the previous daf). Note that a non-Jew nullifies the idol, not a Jew, and only a non-Jew who owns at least part of the idol. Acting in excruciatingly, disrespectful ways before the idol will not nullify it. Also, the idols that were in the land when Joshua conquered it, and the tolerance for idolatrous practice that they Jews were willing to entertain during the sin of the Golden Calf. Also, an object of idolatry that was set aside during a time when the non-Jews would have had ample time to go get the master. (as compared to a peace time, when there's no way to know why the idol was shunted aside).

A dispute on the prohibition of the idol when it's owned by a Jew vs. owned by non-Jew (Rabbi Akiva vs. Rabbi Yishmael). Also, vessels that were used in the "Temple of Onias" -- "chonyo," outside of the Temple, once it had been built. [Note: Historically, the specific temple of Onias was a center of worship for Egyptian Judaism.] Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi forgot (!) the verse from which the external worship was prohibited -- and then he was reminded of it by Rabbi Yosi bar Shaul. Also, the specifics of the Temple - as presented in the tractate Middot - were key in terms of assessing what could and could not be used in the Temple - once they were used unlawfully, even unto the Temple's altar itself (in the time of the Hasmoneans). It was a problem of the stones not being smooth, and so they were hid - but why hide? Why not repurpose them? Plus, the gold of Jerusalem and the coins that were permitted for use.

An idolatry that is served by using a stick, or breaking the stick, in front of an idol, the stick is then prohibited from use. If the stick were thrown, the (Jewish) person is still liable for idolatry, but the stick would not be prohibited for use. The issue may well be whether the practice itself were in use in the service in the Temple, and then recast for idolatry. Which raises a question about the rocks that were thrown in service of Mercury. Also, 2 mishnayot! On the worship on "bamot," altars that were outside of the Mishkan/Tabernacle, which were not always permitted in the time of the Mishkan and prohibited once the Temple was established. Plus, foodstuffs that were prohibited by virtue of idolatrous practices - even, under some circumstances, water and salt. Also, more on the specific idolatrous practices, for example, of Mercury, Pe'or, etc. Also, are there circumstances where that which was given to idolatry could be used? Plus, concerns of payment to pagan priests.

More on the Mercury idol - including stones that were removed from the idol, and were then prohibited. Plus, other idolatries -- more than one that compares the practices of idolatry with the dead, where benefit is prohibited. But stones weren't the Jewish approach in worship, so perhaps it shouldn't be a problem of benefit. Plus, a beraita that was too difficult to unpack -- with the claim that they needed a carpenter, the son of a carpenter to resolve it. Also, another beraita that needed unpacking (about removing worms from a tree, or putting manure on certain places on the given tree. Certain questions and contradictions were not addressed satisfactorily for the sages. [NOTE: Unbeknownst to us, Yardaena's sound cut out - as you may detect easily...though she sounded loud and clear during recording]

Rabbi Yosi vs. the Rabbis - on a field that was fertilized by the manure of idolatry, or the like, and how that field can be planted, and what terms are required for that to happen. Plus, the potential ramifications of their same logic on leavened dough. When the problematic item that is prohibited from benefit, can it be redeemed for money, and then destroy those coins in the Dead Sea? The rabbis say that there's no financial redemption for idolatry. Also, several new mishnayot: One who takes wood from an asherah tree cannot get benefit from that wood, so what happens if that wood were used to heat a new oven? Or an old oven? Or bread? Or a garment that was woven with idolatrous items? What about revoking the idolatrous status? As long as thee non-Jew is clear that he's not treating the tree as an object of worship, then he is not. Plus, the Roman god of Mercury and the stone-throwing idolatrous worship thereof.

A daf of 4 mishnayot! (1) 3 different kinds of trees and how they might have been used for idolatrous purposes, and whether they are permitted afterwards. (2) What is an "asherah"? Different views. (3) On using the shade from the idolatrous tree. (4) Planting vegetables under the asherah tree - in the winter or summer, when is it permitted or prohibited?

Resh Lakish poses a question: What happens to a lulav - a palm branch - from a tree that has been worshipped? That is, in the event that it was planted to begin with in the name of idolatry. Does the use for a mitzvah make it more likely to be permitted? More likely to be forbidden? What about for regular use? Rav Dimi has a different understanding by which to answer Resh Lakish -- consider a tree that was planted for idolatry, and then that status was revoked. Now what, when it comes to mitzvot? Rav Pappa says there's no revocation (in other examples) when it comes to mitzvot. Also, new mishnayot! If one's home abuts the home of an idolater - divide the wall according to thickness. Note - the privacy of the bathroom. Plus, stones that were used to support idols vs. stones that had a covering that was connected to idolatry, and you removed any connection to idolatry....

More on the hills and mountains and rocks - where they are being worshipped by a non-Jew, that is, the boulders that separate from a rocky mountain. Is that boulder like the mountain which isn't prohibited from benefit, or is it like the object of idolatrous worship? Usually, human engagement is necessary to make the object of idolatry prohibited. With a comparison to an animal -- including one that is blemished, as a parallel to the boulder. Also, the factor of being attached the ground - to what extent does that establish the worshipped object as something problematic or not?

A new mishnah! Things in the natural world that were worshipped - and whether that worship made them prohibited for benefit. For the most part, the hills and so on are permitted - the worship doesn't change them, but the obligation to destroy the idolatry itself kicks in. Adornment in the name of idolatry would be different - and prohibited. Also, a redundancy in the Torah: a prohibition against trees that are forbidden because they have been worshipped - and then another verse prohibited "each leafy tree," which appears to be redundant. So Rabbi Akiva provides an explanation that presents a need for both verses. Plus, the question of intent - is the tree planted in the name of idolatry, in which case, it needs to be destroyed, or, alternatively, is the tree already there and then someone decides to worship it?

2 new mishnayot! First, an alternative to taking a graven image to the Dead Sea - grind it off (but then the leavings become fertilizer, which would be getting benefit from it). With a parallel to improper use of that which had been consecrated, including that which emptied into the Kidron Valley (a story of King Asa), where fertilizer was less in use... Also, the story of Rabban Gamliel and the rebuke that comes his way for being in the bathhouse of Aphrodite (he has several defenses).

What is the figure of a dragon that is prohibited? One descriptor is scales between the joints, and that is determined to be the halakhah. Also, the story how Rabbi Elazar ben HaKappar found a ring on the road with the depiction of a dragon and he insisted that an adult non-Jew nullify the idolatrous status of it -- with 3 laws being learned from his behavior. Plus, the fact that the change of status of any item when it is saved from wild animals or a destructive river, or so on -- so why did he need a non-Jew to change the status, when that ring was just found on the road? It depends on the despair of the original owner, but that assumes that the finder is Jewish and not going to sell it. Also, the prohibition against depicting the celestial bodies - but Rabban Gamliel had images of the moon to help assess witnesses who come to testify about the new moon - but how could he have those images?! What about a menorah? There are concerns about replication. Likewise, the faces that are part of God's heavenly throne - how could those images be replicated? The Gemara distinguishes between worshipping (obviously prohibited) vs. depicting, which seems to have been done, and therefore flies in the face of the prohibition.

More on finding shards, and the problematic nature of tangible hands, feet, etc., when found. But why are those tangible imagery forbidden? The idol has been destroyed! Also, the possibility of revoking the idolatrous status, and rendering it permitted for use altogether - how actively, physically must that be done? Or does it have happen on its own, without your intervention? Also, a new mishnah! Certain figures that are considered idolatrous and need to be fully "erased" - at the Dead Sea: sun, moon, stars, dragons. But are those the only possible things that were worshipped? Plus, the issues in depicting people's faces.

A Jew cannot benefit from an object that's been used for idolatry, of course, but that extends to images too. Though the majority view maintains that images are not a problem. Also, broken shards may well be permitted - for use, benefit, and so on. But what if they were the object of idol worship? And what if the shards have the image of a hand or a foot or attached to a pedestal on which the idol stood?

A new mishnah! (from the previous daf) Permitted foods, for a change, including milk that was milked by a non-Jew, who was watched by a Jew, and certain fishes, and more. Plus, a deep dive into fish and roe (fish eggs), vs. other seafood, which birth their young (and are not kosher). But some non-kosher fish also lay eggs. Also, the need for experts who were able to determine whether a given fish and its roe were kosher or not. Plus, a story about Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi, his stomach ache, and its cure in non-Jewishly-made 70-year-old non-Jewish apple wine.

Several kinds of fishes that are prohibited to be eaten. And several that are permitted, including contingent only on where they come from (depending on where that is and whether non-kosher fish are caught together with the kosher ones). Plus, the question of a fish that will eventually get scales, but doesn't have them now, or did have them, but lost them before now - those are all considered kosher too. Also, the story o a sliver of "hiltit," with concern or the knife, if it has absorbed non-kosher food. Plus, tekhelet - when to trust it as genuine? Plus, trusting the wives of meticulous scholars ("chaver") in the same way as those scholars are to be trusted.

Note: Previously labeled Daf 37, "A King's Table," was really the Daf 38 episode, sadly on account of human error. This episode the real Daf 37, "The Not-So-Permissive Court."[Who's Who: Rabbi Yehudah Nesiah, not to be confused with Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi] With a case in his name - regarding the discussion of oil that originates with non-Jews, and when that was then permitted for use by Jews, and a question about permitting the bread of non-Jews. But the sages were concerned that they would labeled a "permissive" court. [Who's Who: Yosi ben Yoezer and the Zugot] Plus, a divorce issued on condition of, for example, the husband not returning in X amount of time, or example more than a year. Also, vegetables that are boiled by non-Jews are prohibited to Jews, but why? Is changing the food (through cooking or grinding) the issue?

More on "bishul akum" -- the rabbinic prohibition against eating food cooked by a non-Jew. But anything that can be eaten raw isn't subject to the prohibition - or, that's what was taught in Sura. In Pompedita, they said the more subjective stipulation - namely, that which was not fit or a king's table was not subject to bishul akum. But there's another practical difference - namely, foods that are not eaten raw, but also are not elegant dining. The Gemara's discussion leads into considerations of what the main food is, as compared to accompaniments. Also, when Jews and non-Jews both cook together -- say, when a Jew puts meat on the coals, and a non-Jew turns the meat: is that permitted? It seems to depend on how involved the non-Jew was in the cooking. Is he expediting the cooking or making it happen?

On the oil that was decreed off-limits, until Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi said it was permitted. So the Gemara delves into the source of the degree, which becomes a far-ranging discussion on kashrut, impurity, and authority. Plus, a list of decrees - which were among 18 degrees that were established on one day - with massive implications for our own day and age.

First, a note on Rabbi Akiva's question on the previous daf. Then, a discussion about the cheese of non-Jews that leads into reflection on the verse, "for your love is better than wine" - is God talking? Are the Jewish people talking? Plus, how decrees were made quietly, lest people not be able to live up to the requirements of the decree, and tactfully. Also, a new mishnah! The list of non-Jews' foods from which Jews are prohibited to eat, but they can get benefit from the things on this list (milk, bread, oil, and more).

A Rabbi Akiva story -- wherein he didn't know the answer to 3 questions, though others in the beit midrash were able to shed light for him. (One of these questions being a straight-up "avodah zarah" Jew/non-Jew interaction question, and the possibility of rehabilitating jugs owned by a non-Jew, which explains the passage's presence on this daf). Also, more on the fish stew -- and the story of how guards were placed to guard the fish stew to make sure nobody added wine to it (risking libation wine, etc.). Note that "cheap wine" was understood to not be problematic to begin with. Plus, the cases of cheese and the woman who is betrothed with the excrement of an ox that awaits stoning.

Jewish wine in non-Jewish jugs - there's a dispute over how prohibited the wine is, and under what conditions. But if there's a Jewish intermediary, that might increase the possibilities. With the perpetual concern being a non-Jew pouring a libation that the Jew might not even notice. Also, Rav Zevid's take on non-Jews tossing things into the wine of the Jews - at what cost? But how did people handle the expense of not using the jugs or other vessels. Also, fish stew and cheese -- how they cooked and how they spiced their food, and so on. With a reduced halakhic concern, as long as no wine is entering the soup, for example. Or calves that were dedicated to idolatry, for example, when they are then used to make cheese.

NOTE: This episode is released out of order (after daf 32) because of a problem with the recording. We apologize for the inconvenience. There are 3 reasons why wine would be prohibited -- that which was used for libation; that which was owned by a non-Jew; that which belonged to a Jew, but what was deposited with a non-Jew. With various degrees of severity regarding benefit and impurity. Plus, an aphorism about a tree's presence and its fruit. Also, a further discussion on beer - and specific kinds of beer that were problematic for various reasons: fraternizing (where the beer is kosher, but avoid the establishment); small amounts of concerning wine mixed in the beer; or beer that was left uncovered, which is its own problem.

[Who's Who: The Emperor Hadrian] Hadrianic ceramics were prohibited for use by Jews -- white earthenware that absorbed the Roman wine, and then was broken and used again. But could it be used for not foodstuffs? Also, a question is raised when the halakhah isn't practical -- that the point isn't just to memorize the halakhah, but following it through, credit to Abaye. Plus, an idolatrous offering can render a place impure.

Various types of wine, and when they are permitted -- mostly they are prohibited, but not necessarily so, for example, if something is prepared prior to the Jew ever appearing as a recipient of the wine, or ointment, or other derivative products. Plus, the distinction between a healing beverage and plain old regular beverage -- and whether they can be prepared on Shabbat. Plus, concerns about how making such beverages can go wrong. Also, the distinction between wine and beer - which is usually acceptable. And the concern about social mingling that can lead to intermarriage. Also, leaving liquid and beverages uncovered - and the risk of the snakes leaving venom in the water.

On bloodletting - as a healing practice - and how the practice would dictate restrictions to one's diet for a time. Also, precautions that a Jew must take in a non-Jew's barber shop (or salon), beginning with watching the barber in the mirror. Including the question of how the mirror helps in a private domain. Plus, a story that illustrates the danger of a haircut in a private domain. Also, a new mishnah! With a list of the items from non-Jews that Jews are not permitted to use, from wine to Hadrianic earthenware to fish stew to cheese that is produced in a setting of idolatry (the Gemara explains these details later, of course).

More on healing -- when the healer is an idolater or when the healing is done on Shabbat. With a focus on vinegar and its healing properties and when it is not permitted even for sipping on Shabbat. Also, a focus on a specific treatment of "raising one's ears" on Shabbat - a physical adjustment, which is permitted on Shabbat. Plus, stories of healing on Shabbat with actual medicine too.

Circumcision that wasn't done for the sake of the mitzvah (or for God) was considered invalid. Of course, whether one needs that degree of intent is up for debate. Note also that non-Jew who happens to be circumcised isn't fulfilling the mitzvah of brit milah. Also, a new mishnah: medical or other health treatments by professionals who are non-Jews are largely prohibited, except for when they can sidestep those regulation -- but noting Rabbi Meir's harsher views in general regarding non-Jews, perhaps because of his lived experience. Note the distinction between monetary and personal treatments. Plus, the concern of Jew going to a non-Jewish barber in a private domain. Likewise, what happens when a Jew has business or medical dealings with a heretic - which is harshly cautioned against?

A Jewish woman shouldn't deliver the child of a non-Jewish (pagan) woman, but the reverse is permitted. Plus, the question of being a wet nurse. Or what about being hired for these roles? Plus, some perspective on the negativity toward non-Jews. Also, a shift in focus to renegade or heretical Jews.

On cows singing... and the sun standing still (how long is a key discussion), among other miracles from the Bible. Plus, the story of Nakdimon. Also, working off the mishnah, on seclusion - a Jewish woman is not allowed to seclude herself with a non-Jew. Nor should a Jewish man seclude himself with a non-Jew, with all kinds of complicated thinking regarding what happens if men met while traveling, and so on (to the extent of one's sword side, etc.).

More on the red heifer... and bestiality. Also, the purchase of precious stones Dama ben Netinah, an apparent idolater. Which seems to have been acceptable when it shouldn't have been. And then he is honored by having a red heifer to sell too. Also, the question of viability of animals bought from non-Jews for the sake of offerings. Plus, the question of the role of biblical figures, including Yitro, in providing offerings to the Children of Israel, after Egypt, and also later.

More on the very difficult topic of bestiality. Beginning with the question of birds. Also, a study of the statuses of "lechathilah" and "bediavad" -- when someone acts in an ideal way or after the fact. With key implications for the assumptions that are made under these different statuses (for example, under what conditions one might make an assumption that rape took place or not). Also, the red heifer - with concerns about the possibility of a sodomized cow. With parallels to the sin-offering, and the role or concern of blemishes.

A story about an idolater who works for a Jew -- and works on Shabbat, when the Jew cannot. Was that allowed? It depends on whether that was their original agreement. And the comparable question regarding a tree where the fruit is orlah. Plus, moving on to chapter 2, with a new mishnah - on the measure of negative relationships between Jews and non-Jews, where the Jews are not permitted to stable their animals at the inns of non-Jews/idolaters, because of the concern of bestiality. Note the focus on pagans/idolaters, not non-Jews pere se. Also, a tosefta contradicts the mishnah, in not being concerned about bestiality or even idolatry per se. Plus, the claim that bestiality would make female animals barren, and male animals weak. Plus, a widow cannot have a dog as a pet.

A new mishnah! A Jew may not rent a house to a non-Jew in the land of Israel, and clearly not a field. In Syria, a Jew may rent a house to the non-Jew, but not the field. And in the Diaspora, a Jew may indeed sell a house to a non-Jew and rent out the fields. (All according to Rabbi Meir). Rabbi Yossi's response is more generous. The Gemara notes that even where one may rent out a house to a non-Jews, there is no permit to do so for purpose of using the space as residential. Plus, the questions that arise (including mezuzah) when a Jew wants to rent to the non-Jew, for example. But for the one who sells in the land of Israel, he would still have puzzlement over what is leftover as a concern of idolatry, for example. Note the extra caution of not selling houses to the Syrians (regardless of the fields). Plus, no bathhouses...

Beginning with a new mishnah that opens on the bottom of daf 19: One may not make jewelry for an object of idolatry -- but you can be hired to do such things, as an artist. Also, note that Jews may not sell that which is attached to the ground to non-Jews. The Gemara will investigate the source of this prohibition - lo techanem - don't do them any mercy - which demands a great deal of investigation, and several possible meanings. But the meaning of the text and the term itself don't quite line up nicely enough - which gives the Gemara more fodder to interpret. Also, a story in the context of this injunction: about Turnus Rufus and Rabbi Akiva, during the Hadrianic Persecutions. The story includes praising the beauty of a woman who worshipped idols, so isn't that an example of a violation of the prohibition - except that we also appreciate the beauty God brings into the world. But men aren't supposed to be gazing on women and contacting on them, regardless of whether they are beautiful.

Avoiding wickedness and wrong-doing: Interpreting the first psalm in the Book of Psalms (Tehilim) - happy is one who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked - as in the generation of the Tower of Babel, or the people of Sodom. Plus, one should learn Torah according to what is a delight -- only that which one's heart desires. Also, if one builds beyond the part that a Jew should build (unto a host section for idolatry), the Jew should still receive his wages -- it's only an accessory to idolatry, not straight up benefit from idol worship. Indeed, under the right terms, the Jew could make the idol itself!

More on Rabbi Hanina ben Teradyon - his trial and interrogation about why he engaged in Torah study. Plus, his daughter who ended up sentenced to a brothel, and why his wife and daughter were punished on account of him. Yet, they all accepted the judgements as deserved, which raises theological questions about reward and punishment. Plus, those who worked alongside Rome and those who defied them, and the difference in their deaths (Rabbi Yossi ben Kismah and Rabbi Haninah ben Teradyon) - including the piety of Rabbi Haninah ben Teradyon, burned with the Torah scroll. With inquiries to him from his daughter, his students, and the Roman executioner. Also, recognition of Beruriah, and her mission for Rabbi Meir to go get her sister out of the brothel. Plus, the question of the "incident with Beruriah."

Jesus! Literally. An appearance in some versions of the Talmud, but not all, as these passages were excised by the Jews -- in this case, as the known teacher of a student who has an encounter with Rabbi Eliezer -- which becomes relevant as he tries to figure out why he suffered arrest for heresy by the Romans. Also, the story of Hanina ben Teradyon (more than a Who's Who) - the passage that recounts what happened to him when he was arrested by the Romans and then killed by them.

Selling horses to idolaters: Because the horse can be used for labor that isn't subject to violation of Jewish law. Also, a new mishnah prohibiting the sale of wild animals that might cause public injury -- with exceptions when the animal wasn't a risk, for whatever reason. Plus, a prohibition against building structures that would house idolatry, though other building may be acceptable.

Another "previous page" mishnah! In a place where they had the practice to sell "small" domesticated animals - sheep and goats - to non-Jews, they were permitted to do so. And in places where they didn't have the practice - they were not allowed to. But large livestock was not permitted in either place. Though some allowed the sale in the event of some damage to the large animals. Plus, the concern of these work-animals working on Shabbat. Also, a Jew cannot keep their own large animals in the stable of a non-Jew's inn, because of concerns of bestiality - an uncomfortable concern to be sure. Also, the question of selling a cow via a broker vs. selling directly (which seems like it should be prohibited). To what extent must the Jew be conscientious about selling things to non-Jews who might use those same things in ways that are objectionable in Judaism (eg - animals that would work the land during a sabbatical year). With many permutations that seem to depend on the seller's clear assumptions about the buyer.

Another mishnah placed on the previous daf: Commercial prohibitions when attempting business with idolaters - but specifically all year long, and not just at the time of their festivals. Among the prohibited items to sell to these non-Jews is a white rooster - though if sold among other roosters, and with a clipped toe (so not perfect for sacrifice), then they may be sold. Plus, the question of selling a damaged white rooster to one who asks for it. Does that mean the non-Jews don't want to make this offering, or are they putting one over on the seller? Also, a much longer, more detailed tractate of Avodah Zarah in Abraham's time (Note: of the 400 chapters mentioned - "400" is generally understood in the Gemara as being the language of exaggeration).

Again, with the relevant mishnah on the previous daf: Buying from shops that are adorned for the non-Jewish pagan holiday was prohibited. Especially when the decorations were scented (eg - roses). Which leads to defining "benefit" - as deriving benefit is what is prohibited, while causing benefit is acceptable, or at least it can be. The concern isn't that of funding idolatry, but the Jew's benefit from idolatry. Plus, those who wore a wreath of roses - an idolatrous practice - received a reduced tax rate, but if you declined, then the extra tax would cover more idolatrous practice. Also, a discussion about not cutting the tendons of a sacred animal because it looks like you're inflicting a blemish on the animal -- but it doesn't just appear like you are; you really are! That prohibition against harming the animal is even - and specifically - in the case of an animal that can't be offered to begin with.

Starting with a new mishnah from the previous daf.... A festival for the non-Jews in the next town can allow for business if the celebration is not right there. Unless heading for the city is the only possible path, in which case, observing the festival seems to be the destination. Plus, there's a lack of concern that the Jews and non-Jews might intermingle their cooking utensils - a rabbinic prohibition, in an case -- for kashrut as a parallel case to the idolatry. Also, a traveler to a place where the festival is taking place - with various concerns about appearing to bow before an idol. Plus, a concern of "danger" - so drinking, for example, directly from the water source is not recommened.

On Onkelos the convert, who is known for translating the Torah, and also for his ability to convert Romans to Judaism, as his "gift of gab" shows on this daf. Also, the particulars of another pagan festival - with several component parts - as an example of the tension between the Jews and non-Jews over their holidays.