Commentary page

Avodah Zarah 36a

This page gathers the commentary on one source unit: the classic commentaries as they are printed, the sources the text cites, the sages named in it and direct links back to the text.

Read the full text in the reader

Babylonian Talmud · folio map

Avodah Zarah 36a

Avodah Zarah 36a. The full printed text of this folio side — 11 numbered segments, about 326 words — with the classic commentaries printed on the page.

Original text

Segment 1

זְלִיפָתָן שֶׁל כֵּלִים טְמֵאִים אוֹסַרְתָּן. אַטּוּ כּוּלֵּי עָלְמָא אוֹכְלֵי טְהָרוֹת נִינְהוּ? אֶלָּא, זְלִיפָתָן שֶׁל כֵּלִים אֲסוּרִין אוֹסַרְתָּן.

The secretion of ritually impure vessels prohibits the oil that gentiles pour into them. The Gemara asks: Is that to say that all people are consumers of only ritually pure substances? Since it is common practice to eat ritually impure foods, why should the secretion of impure vessels render the oil prohibited? The Gemara emends Shmuel’s statement: Rather, the secretion of prohibited vessels prohibits the oil, as it absorbs the prohibited substances.

Segment 2

אֲמַר לֵיהּ שְׁמוּאֵל לְרַב: בִּשְׁלָמָא לְדִידִי דְּאָמֵינָא זְלִיפָתָן שֶׁל כֵּלִים אֲסוּרִין אוֹסַרְתָּן, הַיְינוּ דְּכִי אֲתָא רַב יִצְחָק בַּר שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר מָרְתָא וְאָמַר: דָּרֵישׁ רַבִּי שִׂמְלַאי בִּנְצִיבִין: שֶׁמֶן, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה וּבֵית דִּינוֹ נִמְנוּ עָלָיו וְהִתִּירוּהוּ.

Shmuel said to Rav: Granted, according to my opinion, as I say that the secretion of prohibited vessels prohibits the oil, this is how one can understand that when Rav Yitzḥak bar Shmuel bar Marta came, he said that Rabbi Simlai taught in Netzivin: With regard to oil, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and his court were counted, i.e., voted, on this matter and permitted it.

Segment 3

קָסָבַר: נוֹתֵן טַעַם לִפְגָם — מוּתָּר.

Shmuel elaborates: It can be explained that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi holds: A prohibited substance that imparts flavor to the detriment of the mixture is permitted. According to Shmuel’s explanation, the prohibition was revoked because the taste absorbed by the oil would have impaired its flavor rather than enhanced it.

Segment 4

אֶלָּא לְדִידָךְ דְּאָמְרַתְּ דָּנִיאֵל גָּזַר עָלָיו, דָּנִיאֵל גְּזַר וַאֲתָא רַבִּי יְהוּדָה הַנָּשִׂיא וּמְבַטֵּל לֵיהּ? וְהָתְנַן: אֵין בֵּית דִּין יָכוֹל לְבַטֵּל דִּבְרֵי בֵּית דִּין חֲבֵירוֹ, אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן גָּדוֹל הֵימֶנּוּ בְּחָכְמָה וּבְמִנְיָן!

But according to you, Rav, who said that Daniel decreed a prohibition upon the oil of gentiles, how can this be understood? Can it be said that Daniel decreed it, and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi came and voided the decree? But didn’t we learn in a mishna ( Eduyyot 1:5): A court cannot void the statements of another court, unless it is greater than it in wisdom and in number? According to Rav, how could Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi void a decree issued by Daniel?

Segment 5

אֲמַר לֵיהּ שִׂמְלַאי לוּדָּאָה קָא אָמְרַתְּ? שָׁאנֵי לוּדָּאֵי דִּמְזַלְזְלוּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֶשְׁלַח לֵיהּ? אִיכְּסִיף.

Rather than answering Shmuel’s question directly, Rav first rejects his proof: Rav said to him: Was it Rabbi Simlai of Lod of whom you spoke? Residents of Lod are different, as they disparage the Sages’ decrees, and therefore Rabbi Simlai’s testimony is unreliable. Shmuel said to him: Shall I send for him? As a result, Rav became embarrassed.

Segment 6

אָמַר רַב: אִם הֵם לֹא דָּרְשׁוּ, אֲנַן לָא דָּרְשִׁינַן? וְהָכְתִיב: ״וַיָּשֶׂם דָּנִיֵּאל עַל לִבּוֹ אֲשֶׁר לֹא יִתְגָּאַל בְּפַת בַּג הַמֶּלֶךְ וּבְיֵין מִשְׁתָּיו״ — בִּשְׁתֵּי מִשְׁתָּאוֹת הַכָּתוּב מְדַבֵּר, אֶחָד מִשְׁתֵּה יַיִן וְאֶחָד מִשְׁתֵּה שֶׁמֶן.

Rav claimed that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and his court erred in permitting the oil of gentiles, which Daniel had prohibited. Rav said: If they, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and his court, did not expound the following verse, will we not expound it? We must certainly do so. Isn’t it written: “But Daniel purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself with the king’s food, nor with the wine which he drank [ mishtav ]” (Daniel 1:8)? The word mishtav is in the plural, indicating that the verse speaks of two types of drinking: One is the drinking of wine, and one is the drinking of oil. Accordingly, Daniel himself refrained from consuming oil of gentiles, as he instituted this prohibition. Why does Shmuel reject this inference, which indicates that Daniel issued this decree?

Segment 7

רַב סָבַר: עַל לִבּוֹ שָׂם, וּלְכׇל יִשְׂרָאֵל הוֹרָה; וּשְׁמוּאֵל סָבַר: עַל לִבּוֹ שָׂם, וּלְכׇל יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא הוֹרָה.

The Gemara explains that Rav maintained: Daniel placed the prohibition against consuming the oil of gentiles upon his heart, i.e., for himself, and he instructed all Jews to adhere to it as well. And Shmuel held: Daniel placed the prohibition upon his heart, but he did not instruct all Jews to accept it.

Segment 8

וְשֶׁמֶן, דָּנִיאֵל גְּזַר? וְהָאָמַר בָּאלִי אֲבִימִי נִוְתָאָה מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב: פִּיתָּן וְשַׁמְנָן, יֵינָן וּבְנוֹתֵיהֶן, כּוּלָּן מִשְּׁמֹנָה עָשָׂר דָּבָר הֵן.

The Gemara asks: And is it correct that Daniel decreed that oil is prohibited? But doesn’t Balei say that Avimi of Nota [ Nota’a ] says in the name of Rav: The prohibitions of gentiles’ bread and their oil, their wine and their daughters, are all from the eighteen matters decreed in a single day in the days of the students of Shammai and Hillel. Apparently, Rav himself maintains that the prohibition was not instituted by Daniel.

Segment 9

וְכִי תֵּימָא: אֲתָא דָּנִיאֵל גְּזַר וְלָא קַיבֻּל, וַאֲתוֹ תַּלְמִידֵי דְּהִלֵּל וְשַׁמַּאי וּגְזוּר וְקַיבֻּל, אִם כֵּן מַאי אַסְהָדוּתֵיהּ דְּרַב? אֶלָּא, דָּנִיאֵל גָּזַר עָלָיו בָּעִיר, וַאֲתוֹ אִינְהוּ וּגְזוּר אֲפִילּוּ בַּשָּׂדֶה.

The Gemara adds: And if you would say that Daniel came and decreed but the people did not accept it, and later the students of Hillel and Shammai came and decreed with regard to gentiles’ oil and the people accepted it, if that is so, what is the significance of Rav’s testimony that Daniel initially instituted the prohibition? The Gemara explains: Rather, Daniel decreed upon the oil of gentiles in the city, and the students of Shammai and Hillel came and decreed that it is prohibited even in the field.

Segment 10

וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה הַנָּשִׂיא הֵיכִי מָצֵי לְמִישְׁרֵא תַּקַּנְתָּא דְּתַלְמִידֵי שַׁמַּאי וְהִלֵּל? וְהָתְנַן: אֵין בֵּית דִּין יָכוֹל לְבַטֵּל דִּבְרֵי בֵּית דִּין חֲבֵירוֹ, אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן גָּדוֹל הֵימֶנּוּ בְּחָכְמָה וּבְמִנְיָן! וְעוֹד, הָא אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: בַּכֹּל יָכוֹל לְבַטֵּל בֵּית דִּין דִּבְרֵי בֵּית דִּין חֲבֵירוֹ, חוּץ מִשְּׁמוֹנָה עָשָׂר דָּבָר, שֶׁאֲפִילּוּ יָבֹא אֵלִיָּהוּ וּבֵית דִּינוֹ אֵין שׁוֹמְעִין לוֹ!

The Gemara asks: And how could Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi permit an ordinance issued by the students of Shammai and Hillel? But didn’t we learn in a mishna that a court cannot void the statements of another court, unless it is greater than it in wisdom and in number? And furthermore, doesn’t Rabba bar bar Ḥana say that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: With regard to all issues, a court can void the statements of another court, except the eighteen matters decreed by the students of Beit Shammai, as, even if Elijah and his court were to come and rescind them, one would not listen to him.

Segment 11

אָמַר רַב מְשַׁרְשְׁיָא: מַה טַּעַם? הוֹאִיל וּפָשַׁט אִיסּוּרוֹ בְּרוֹב יִשְׂרָאֵל, שֶׁמֶן לֹא פָּשַׁט אִיסּוּרוֹ בְּרוֹב יִשְׂרָאֵל, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר אַבָּא אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: יָשְׁבוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ וּבָדְקוּ עַל שֶׁמֶן שֶׁלֹּא פָּשַׁט אִיסּוּרוֹ בְּרוֹב יִשְׂרָאֵל, וְסָמְכוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ עַל דִּבְרֵי רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְעַל דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בַּר צָדוֹק, שֶׁהָיוּ אוֹמְרִים: אֵין גּוֹזְרִין גְּזֵירָה עַל הַצִּבּוּר אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן רוֹב צִבּוּר יְכוֹלִין לַעֲמוֹד בָּהּ, דְּאָמַר רַב אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה: מַאי קְרָא?

Rav Mesharshiyya said: What is the reason that none of the eighteen decrees can be voided? Since the prohibition spread among the majority of the Jewish people, it cannot be voided. But with regard to oil, its prohibition did not spread among the majority of the Jewish people, and therefore it can be voided. As Rabbi Shmuel bar Abba says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Our Sages sat and inspected the matter of gentiles’ oil and determined that its prohibition had not spread among the majority of the Jewish people, and our Sages relied upon the statement of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel and upon the statement of Rabbi Elazar bar Tzadok, who would say: The Sages issue a decree upon the community only if most of the community is able to abide by it. As Rav Adda bar Ahava said: What is the verse from which it is derived?

Avodah Zarah 36a

Avodah Zarah 36a

Rashi

Tosafot

Rabbeinu Chananel

Ritva

Meiri

Maharsha (Chidushei Halachot)

Maharam

Gilyon HaShas

What this page contains

Continue the sequence

Parallel sources

Lessons and study tools

Sages named on this page

Original text