Avodah Zarah

It has been stated: If an 'am ha-arez  stretched his hand into a winepress and touched [one of] the clusters, Rabbi and R. Hiyya [express different opinions]. One says that the cluster and all that is around it are defiled  but the press as a whole is undefiled, whereas the other says that the entire press is also defiled. According to him who maintained that the clusters and all that is around them are defiled but the press as a whole is undefiled, why should there be a difference, since we learnt:  'If a reptile is found in an oil-mill, it only defiles the place it touches, but if there is flowing liquid it is all defiled'? — In this latter case there is no division at all,  but in the former the clusters are separate. The Rabbis taught R. Jeremiah — another version is, [they taught] R. Jeremiah's son — in agreement with him who says that the cluster and all that is around it are defiled but the press as a whole is undefiled. MISHNAH. IF [AN ISRAELITE] PURCHASES COOKING-UTENSILS  FROM A HEATHEN, THOSE WHICH ARE CUSTOMARILY CLEANSED BY IMMERSION  HE MUST IMMERSE, BY SCALDING HE MUST SCALD, BY MAKING WHITE-HOT IN THE FIRE HE MUST MAKE WHITE-HOT IN THE FIRE. A SPIT AND GRILL MUST BE MADE WHITE-HOT, BUT A KNIFE MAY BE POLISHED AND IS THEN RITUALLY CLEAN. GEMARA. It has been taught: They all  need to be immersed in [a ritual bath containing a minimum of] forty se'ah.  Whence is this derived? — Raba said: Because Scripture states, Every thing that may abide the fire ye shall make to go through the fire, and it shall be clean.  Scripture  has here added for you an additional [process of] cleansing. Bar Kappara taught: From the text, [Nevertheless it shall be purified] with the water of separation,  I might have inferred that [a Gentile's utensil] requires sprinkling [with this water] on the third and seventh day;  therefore the word nevertheless is used, the purpose of which is to make a distinction. If that be so, what is the purpose of the words with the water of separation [niddah]? It signifies water in which a niddah  immerses. And it was necessary for Scripture to write both and it shall be clean, and with the water of separation. If it had only written, and it shall be clean, I might have thought, it shall be clean means by any quantity of water, so the Divine Law wrote, with the water of separation; and if the Divine Law had only written, with the water of separation, I might have thought that [it only becomes ritually clean] at sunset as happens with a niddah, so the Divine Law wrote and it shall be clean, i.e., immediately [after the immersion]. R. Nahman said in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha: Even new utensils  must be included, since old ones when made white-hot are regarded as new and for all that require to be immersed. R. Shesheth raised the objection: If this be so, shearing-scissors should likewise [be immersed if obtained from a heathen]! — [R. Nahman] replied: The Scriptural passage deals with utensils connected with a meal. R. Nahman said in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha: The teaching only applies to utensils which are purchased as then happened,  but not when they are borrowed. R. Isaac b. Joseph bought a vessel made from a mixture of earth and animal's ordure from a heathen and thought to immerse it. A certain Rabbi, named R. Jacob, said to him: It was explained to me by R. Johanan that the Scriptural passage deals only with utensils of metal. R. Ashi said: Utensils of glass, since they can be repaired when broken, are like utensils of metal.  As for a glazed utensil R. Aha and Rabina differ; one maintains [that it must be treated] according to its original state,  while the other maintains [that it must be treated] according to its final state.  The legal decision is [that it must be treated] according to its final state. The question was asked: How is it with [a new vessel which had been given by a heathen] as a pledge? — Mar son of R. Ashi said: A heathen deposited a silver goblet with my father as a pledge, and he immersed it and drank from it; but I do not know whether it was because he considered a pledge to be the same as a bought article or for the reason that he saw that the heathen's intention was to leave it with him. Our Rabbis taught: If [an Israelite] purchases cooking-utensils from a heathen, the unused articles are to be immersed and are then clean; as for those which were used for cold things, such as cups, jugs and flasks, they must be rinsed and immersed and are then clean; but as for those which were used for hot things, such as boilers, kettles and heating vessels, they must be scalded and immersed and are then clean. Utensils used with fire, such as spits and grills, must be made white-hot and immersed and are then clean. If, with all of them, any had been used [by an Israelite] before it was immersed or scalded or made white-hot, one authority teaches that [the contents] are prohibited whereas another teaches that they are permitted. There is, however, no contradiction; for one decides according to him who said that when [the forbidden element] imparts a worsened flavour it is prohibited and the other according to him who said that when it imparts a worsened flavour it is permitted.  But according to him who maintains that when it imparts a worsened flavour it is permitted, in which circumstance can the prohibition of the Divine Law against the use of Gentiles' vessels  apply?  — R. Hiyya, the son of R. Huna  said: The Torah only forbade a utensil