Mishneh Torah — Forbidden Foods (Ma'akhalot Asurot) הלכות מאכלות אסורות, Chapter 13

הַלוֹקֵחַ בַּיִת אוֹ שֶׁשָּׂכָר בַּיִת בַּחֲצֵרוֹ שֶׁל עַכּוּ"ם וּמִלְּאָהוּ יַיִן אִם הָיָה הַיִּשְׂרְאֵלִי דָּר בְּאוֹתָהּ חָצֵר אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהַפֶּתַח פָּתוּחַ הַיַּיִן מֻתָּר. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהָעַכּוּ"ם מְפַחֵד תָּמִיד וְאוֹמֵר עַתָּה יִכָּנֵס לְבֵיתוֹ פִּתְאֹם וְיִמְצָא אוֹתִי בְּתוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ. וְאִם הָיָה דָּר בְּחָצֵר אַחֶרֶת לֹא יֵצֵא עַד שֶׁיִּסְגֹּר הַבַּיִת וְיִהְיֶה הַמַּפְתֵּחַ וְהַחוֹתָם בְּיָדוֹ. וְאֵינוֹ חוֹשֵׁשׁ שֶׁמָּא יְזַיֵּף הָעַכּוּ"ם מַפְתֵּחַ הַבַּיִת:

[The following rules apply when a Jew] purchases or rents a building in a courtyard belonging to a gentile and fills it with wine. If the Jew lives in that courtyard, the wine is permitted even if the entrance is open. [The rationale is that] the gentile will always worry, saying: "He may suddenly enter his building and find me there." If the Jew lives in another courtyard, he should not depart until he closes the building and keeps the key and the seal 130:2) writes that since in the present age, most gentiles are not idolaters, only one seal is necessary. The Siftei Cohen 130:11) states that this principle should be applied in the present instance. in his possession. He need not fear that the gentile will make a copy of the key to the building.

יָצָא וְלֹא סָגַר הַפֶּתַח אוֹ שֶׁסָּגַר וְהִנִּיחַ הַמַּפְתֵּחַ בְּיַד עַכּוּ"ם הֲרֵי הַיַּיִן אָסוּר בִּשְׁתִיָּה. שֶׁמָּא נִכְנַס הָעַכּוּ"ם וְנִסֵּךְ. שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵין הַיִּשְׂרְאֵלִי שָׁם. וְאִם אָמַר לוֹ אֱחֹז לִי מַפְתֵּחַ זֶה עַד שֶׁאָבוֹא הַיַּיִן מֻתָּר שֶׁלֹּא מָסַר לוֹ שְׁמִירַת הַבַּיִת אֶלָּא שְׁמִירַת הַמַּפְתֵּחַ:

When [the Jew] left [the building] without closing the entrance or closed it and gave the key to the gentile, it is forbidden to drink the wine. Perhaps the gentile entered and poured a libation, for the Jew is not present there.If [the Jew] told [the gentile]: "Hold the key for me until I come," the wine is permitted. He did not entrust him with guarding the house, only with guarding the key. (Yoreh De'ah 129:5) quotes the Rambam's ruling.

עַכּוּ"ם שֶׁשָּׂכַר יִשְׂרָאֵל לִדְרֹךְ לוֹ יֵינוֹ בְּטָהֳרָה כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּהְיֶה מֻתָּר לְיִשְׂרָאֵל וְיִקָּחוּהוּ מִמֶּנּוּ וְהָיָה הַיַּיִן בְּבֵיתוֹ שֶׁל עַכּוּ"ם. אִם הָיָה יִשִׂרָאֵל זֵה שֵׁשּׁוֹמֵר הַיַּיִן דָּר בְּאוֹתָהּ חָצֵר הַיַּיִן מֻתָּר. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהַפֶּתַח פָּתוּחַ וְהַשּׁוֹמֵר נִכְנָס וְיוֹצֵא. וְאִם הָיָה הַשּׁוֹמֵר דָּר בְּחָצֵר אַחֶרֶת הַיַּיִן אָסוּר. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהַמַּפְתֵּחַ וְהַחוֹתָם בְּיַד יִשְׂרָאֵל. שֶׁכֵּיוָן שֶׁהַיַּיִן שֶׁל עַכּוּ"ם וּבִרְשׁוּתוֹ אֵינוֹ מְפַחֵד לְזַיֵּף וּלְהִכָּנֵס לַבַּיִת וְיֹאמַר וִיהִי מָה אִם יֵדְעוּ בּוֹ לֹא יִקְחוּ מִמֶּנִּי:

[The following laws apply when] a gentile hires a Jew to prepare wine for him in a state of ritual purity so that it will be permitted to the Jews and they will purchase it from him. The wine is [stored] in a building belonging to the gentile. If the Jew who is guarding the wine lives in that courtyard, the wine is permitted. [This applies] even if the entrance is open and the [Jewish] guard goes out and returns.If the guard lives in another courtyard,). The Ra'avad differs and maintains that as long as the Jew enters and leaves at will, that is sufficient to inhibit the gentile from touching the wine. [Significantly, in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Avodah Zarah 4:11), the Rambam adopts a position similar to that of the Ra'avad.]The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 131:1 adopt an intermediate position, stating that if there is another Jew living in that city and the entrance to the building where the wine is stored is visible from the public domain, the wine is permitted. For the owner will be afraid to break the lock to the door lest he be seen and the matter become known. (This approach is also mentioned in the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (loc. cit). the wine is forbidden even though the key and the seal are in the possession of a Jew. [The rationale is that] since the wine belongs to the gentile and is found in his domain, he does not fear falsifying [the seal and/or key] and to enter the building. He will say: "What could be? If they find out about this, they will not purchase [the wine] from me."

אֲפִלּוּ כָּתַב הָעַכּוּ"ם לְיִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁנִּתְקַבֵּל מִמֶּנּוּ הַמָּעוֹת לִמְכֹּר לוֹ בָּהֶן יַיִן הוֹאִיל וְאֵין הַיִּשְׂרְאֵלִי יָכוֹל לְהוֹצִיאוֹ מֵרְשׁוּת הָעַכּוּ"ם עַד שֶׁיִּתֵּן לוֹ הַמָּעוֹת הֲרֵי הוּא שֶׁל עַכּוּ"ם וְאָסוּר. אֶלָּא אִם הָיָה הַשּׁוֹמֵר דָּר שָׁם בֶּחָצֵר. וְאֵין הַשּׁוֹמֵר צָרִיךְ לִהְיוֹת יוֹשֵׁב וּמְשַׁמֵּר תָּמִיד אֶלָּא נִכְנָס וְיוֹצֵא כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ. בֵּין בִּרְשׁוּת בַּעַל הַיַּיִן בֵּין בִּרְשׁוּת עַכּוּ"ם אַחֵר:

Even if a gentile wrote [a legal document] for the Jew stating that he received the money for which he agreed to sell him the wine, 131:1 writes that these stringencies apply only if the Jew did not pay the gentile anything at all. Once the Jew pays the gentile something, the wine is considered his and more lenient rules apply. It is questionable, however, if the Rambam would accept this leniency, for as stated in Chapter 12, Halachah 25, he rules that as long as wine is security for a debt, a gentile creditor will feel free to do with it as he desires. since the Jew cannot remove the wine from the gentile's domain until he pays him the money, the wine belongs to the gentile and it is forbidden unless the guard lives in the courtyard.The guard does not have to sit and guard [the wine] at all times. Instead, he may come in and go out, as explained. [This applies whether the wine is stored] in the domain belonging to the owner of the wine or in a domain belonging to another gentile.

הָיָה יַיִן זֶה הַטָּהוֹר שֶׁל עַכּוּ"ם מֻנָּח בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים אוֹ בְּבַיִת הַפָּתוּחַ לִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים וְיִשְׂרָאֵל הוֹלְכִים וְשָׁבִים מֻתָּר. שֶׁעֲדַיִן לֹא נִכְנַס בִּרְשׁוּת הָעַכּוּ"ם:

When the pure wine belonging to a gentile was placed in the public domain or in a building that is open to the public domain and there are Jews going back and forth, it is permitted. 4:11). For it has not entered the gentile's domain.

וְאַשְׁפָּה וְחַלּוֹן וְדֶקֶל אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ פֵּרוֹת הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים. וְחָבִית יַיִן שָׁם וְעַכּוּ"ם הַנִּמְצָא שָׁם אֵינוֹ אוֹסְרָהּ. וּבַיִת הַפָּתוּחַ לְשָׁם הֲרֵי הוּא כְּפָתוּחַ לִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים:

[When wine is located] in a garbage dump, a window, or under a palm tree even if it does not have fruit, it is as [if it is located in] the public domain. When a gentile is located near wine located in such a place, it is not forbidden. A house which is open to such a place is considered as if it as open to the public domain.

חָצֵר הַחֲלוּקָה בִּמְסִיפִים וְעַכּוּ"ם בְּצַד זֶה וְיִשְׂרָאֵל בְּצַד אַחֵר. וְכֵן שְׁנֵי גַּגִּין שֶׁהָיָה גַּג יִשְׂרָאֵל לְמַעְלָה וְגַג הָעַכּוּ"ם לְמַטָּה. אוֹ שֶׁהָיוּ זֶה בְּצַד זֶה וְיֵשׁ בֵּינֵיהֶן מְסִיפִים. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיַּד הָעַכּוּ"ם מַגַּעַת לְחֵלֶק יִשְׂרָאֵל אֵינוֹ חוֹשֵׁשׁ מִשּׁוּם יֵין נֶסֶךְ וְלֹא מִשּׁוּם טָהֳרוֹת:

[The following rule applies when] there is a courtyard divided by low barriers, 70a. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 129:16) defines the term as meaning pillars. on one side there is a gentile and on the other, a Jew, there are two roofs, with the Jew's roof located above the gentile's roof, or [the two roofs are located] side by side, but there are dividers separating them. Even though the gentile can reach the Jew's portion, he need not worry about [the gentile pouring] his wine as a libation or [disqualifying] articles that are ritually pure.

מֻתָּר לְיִשְׂרָאֵל לְהַפְקִיד יֵינוֹ בִּכְלִי סָתוּם בְּיַד עַכּוּ"ם וְהוּא שֶׁיִּהְיֶה לוֹ בּוֹ שְׁנֵי סִימָנִין. וְזֶה הוּא הַנִּקְרָא חוֹתָם בְּתוֹךְ חוֹתָם. כֵּיצַד. סָתַם הֶחָבִית בִּכְלִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְהֻדָּק כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁסּוֹתְמִין כָּל אָדָם וְטָח בְּטִיט הֲרֵי זֶה חוֹתָם אֶחָד. הָיָה כְּלִי מְהֻדָּק וְטָח עָלָיו מִלְּמַעְלָה הֲרֵי זֶה חוֹתָם בְּתוֹךְ חוֹתָם. וְכֵן אִם צָר פִּי הַנּוֹד הֲרֵי זֶה חוֹתָם אֶחָד. הָפַךְ פִּי הַנּוֹד לְתוֹכוֹ וְצָר עָלָיו הֲרֵי זֶה חוֹתָם בְּתוֹךְ חוֹתָם. וְכֵן כָּל שִׁנּוּי שֶׁמְּשַׁנֶּה מִדְּבָרִים שֶׁאֵין דֶּרֶךְ כָּל אָדָם הֲרֵי הֵן כְּחוֹתָם אֶחָד וְהַטִּיחָה אוֹ הַקְּשִׁירָה חוֹתָם שֵׁנִי:

It is permitted for a Jew to entrust his wine to a gentile for safekeeping in a closed container, provided it has two distinguishing marks. This is referred to as "a seal within a seal."What is implied? [A Jew] closed a barrel with a utensil that is not tightly fitting as most people do and then sealed it with clay, it is considered as one seal. If the container is tightly fitting and he applied clay to it from above, it is considered as "a seal within a seal."Similarly, if one tied the opening to a wineskin close, it is considered as one seal. If he turned the opening to the wineskin inside and then tied it close, it is considered as "a seal within a seal." Similarly, any deviation from the ordinary pattern people follow is considered as one seal and applying clay or tying it is a second seal.

וְאִם הִפְקִיד בְּיַד עַכּוּ"ם בְּחוֹתָם אֶחָד הֲרֵי זֶה אָסוּר בִּשְׁתִיָּה וּמֻתָּר בַּהֲנָיָה וְהוּא שֶׁיְּיַחֵד לוֹ קֶרֶן זָוִית:

If [a Jew] entrusted [wine that was closed] with one seal to a gentile for safekeeping, it is forbidden to drink it, but it is permitted to benefit from it provided he designates a [specific] corner for it. 31a, some interpret this as speaking about an instance where the corner the gentile grants the Jew is closed off with a seal. The Rama (Yoreh De'ah 130:2) writes that there are opinions which rule that after the fact, one seal is sufficient in this situation.The Lechem Mishneh explains that even if the place is not closed off, since it is designated for the Jew, one seal is sufficient. See Turei Zahav 130:4).

יַיִן מְבֻשָּׁל וְהַשֵּׁכָר אוֹ יַיִן שֶׁעֵרְבוֹ עִם דְּבָרִים אֲחֵרִים כְּגוֹן דְּבַשׁ וְשֶׁמֶן וְכֵן הַחֹמֶץ וְהַגְּבִינָה וְהֶחָלָב וְכָל שֶׁאִסּוּרוֹ מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים שֶׁהִפְקִידוֹ בְּיַד עַכּוּ"ם אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ שְׁנֵי חוֹתָמוֹת אֶלָּא חוֹתָם אֶחָד בִּלְבַד דַּיּוֹ. אֲבָל הַיַּיִן וְהַבָּשָׂר וַחֲתִיכַת דָּג שֶׁאֵין בָּהּ סִימָן שֶׁהִפְקִידָן בְּיַד עַכּוּ"ם צְרִיכִין שְׁנֵי חוֹתָמוֹת:

Two seals are not necessary when one deposits boiled wine, beer, wine which is mixed with other substances, e.g., honey or oil, – and similarly, vinegar, cheese, and any substance that is forbidden only according to Rabbinic Law – with a gentile. Instead, one seal is sufficient.). Nevertheless, two seals are necessary for wine, meat, and pieces of fish that do not have signs and which were entrusted to a gentile.

יֵרָאֶה לִי שֶׁכָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁאָמַרְנוּ בְּעִנְיָן זֶה בְּיַיִן שֶׁלָּנוּ שֶׁהוּא אָסוּר בִּשְׁתִיָּה וּמֻתָּר בַּהֲנָיָה מִפְּנֵי צַד נְגִיעָה שֶׁנָּגַע בּוֹ הָעַכּוּ"ם כְּשֶׁהָיָה הָעַכּוּ"ם עוֹבֵד עַכּוּ"ם. אֲבָל אִם הָיָה אִסּוּרוֹ בִּגְלַל עַכּוּ"ם שֶׁאֵינוֹ עוֹבֵד עַכּוּ"ם כְּגוֹן יִשְׁמְעֵאלִי שֶׁנָּגַע בַּיַּיִן שֶׁלָּנוּ שֶׁלֹּא בְּכַוָּנָה אוֹ שֶׁטִּפַּח עַל פִּי הֶחָבִית הֲרֵי זֶה מֻתָּר בִּשְׁתִיָּה. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה:

It appears to me that anywhere in this context that we have stated that our wine is forbidden to be drunk, but it is permitted to benefit from it because of the possibility that a gentile touched it, we are speaking about an instance where the gentile is an idolater. If, however, the prohibition has arisen because of a gentile who is not an idolater, e.g., an Arab, 124:24) rules that in the present era, none of the gentiles are considered as idolaters and the leniency suggested by the Rambam applies universally. On that basis, he and the subsequent Ashkenazic authorities have suggested several leniencies. who touched our wine unintentionally or tapped the top of a barrel, [the wine] is permitted to be drunken. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.

אֲבָל הַמַּפְקִיד יַיִן בְּיַד גֵּר תּוֹשָׁב אוֹ שֶׁשְּׁלָחוֹ עִמּוֹ וְהִפְלִיג אוֹ שֶׁהֵנִיחַ בֵּיתוֹ פָּתוּחַ בַּחֲצַר גֵּר תּוֹשָׁב הֲרֵי זֶה אָסוּר בִּשְׁתִיָּה. שֶׁכָּל חֲשָׁשׁ שֶׁל חִלּוּף וְזִיּוּף יֵרָאֶה לִי שֶׁכָּל הָעַכּוּ"ם שָׁוִים בּוֹ הוֹאִיל וְנַעֲשָׂה הַיַּיִן בִּרְשׁוּתָן נֶאֱסַר בִּשְׁתִיָּה עַל כָּל פָּנִים:

When, however, one deposits wine in the domain of a resident alien sends wine with him and departs for an extended period, or leaves one's home open in a courtyard that [one shares with] a resident alien, it is forbidden to drink the wine. For it appears to me that the suspicions that a gentile will exchange [wine] and forge [a seal] apply equally to all gentiles. Since the wine enters their domain, it is forbidden at least to drink it.

יֵשׁ דְּבָרִים שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶם אִסּוּר נִסּוּךְ כְּלָל וְאָסְרוּ אוֹתָם חֲכָמִים כְּדֵי לְהַרְחִיק מִן הַנִּסּוּךְ. וְאֵלּוּ הֵן. לֹא יִמְזֹג הָעַכּוּ"ם הַמַּיִם לְתוֹךְ הַיַּיִן שֶׁבְּיַד יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁמָּא יָבוֹא לִצֹּק הַיַּיִן לְתוֹךְ הַמַּיִם. וְלֹא יוֹלִיךְ הָעַכּוּ"ם עֲנָבִים לַגַּת שֶׁמָּא יָבוֹא לִדְרֹךְ אוֹ לִגַּע. וְלֹא יְסַיֵּעַ לְיִשְׂרָאֵל בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁמֵּרִיק מִכְּלִי לִכְלִי שֶׁמָּא יַנִּיחַ הַכְּלִי בְּיַד הָעַכּוּ"ם וְנִמְצָא הַיַּיִן בָּא מִכֹּחוֹ. וְאִם סִיֵּעַ אוֹ מָזַג הַמַּיִם אוֹ הֵבִיא עֲנָבִים מֻתָּר:

There are situations where the prohibition against wine poured as a libation does not apply at all, yet our Sages forbade them as a safeguard against libation. They are: a gentile should not mix water into wine in a Jew's possession lest he come to pour wine into water. A gentile should not bring grapes to the winepress lest he come to press them or touch the wine. He should not help a Jew when he pours wine from one container to another lest he leave the wine in the possession of the gentile and the wine [will flow] because of [the gentile's] power. If the gentile assists [the Jew], mixes water [into wine] or brings grapes, [the wine] is permitted. 58b) and other Rishonim rule more stringently, the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 125:3,6,7) accepts the Rambam's position.

וְכֵן מֻתָּר שֶׁיָּרִיחַ הָעַכּוּ"ם בְּחָבִית שֶׁל יַיִן שֶׁלָּנוּ. וּמֻתָּר לְיִשְׂרָאֵל לְהָרִיחַ בְּחָבִית שֶׁל יֵין נֶסֶךְ וְאֵין בָּזֶה שֵׁם אִסּוּר שֶׁאֵין הָרֵיחַ כְּלוּם לְפִי שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ מַמָּשׁ:

Similarly, it is permitted for a gentile to smell the fragrance of our wine and it is permitted for a Jew to smell the fragrance of a barrel of wine that had been used as a libation. There is no prohibition against this, because fragrance is of no consequence since it has no substance., where the Rambam delivers a slightly contradictory ruling.

כְּבָר בֵּאַרְנוּ שֶׁכָּל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא אָסוּר בַּהֲנָיָה אִם עָבַר וּמָכְרוּ דָּמָיו מֻתָּרִין חוּץ מֵעַכּוּ"ם וּמְשַׁמְּשֶׁיהָ וְתִקְרֹבֶת שֶׁלָּהּ וְיַיִן שֶׁנִּתְנַסֵּךְ לָהּ. וְהֶחְמִירוּ חֲכָמִים בִּסְתַם יֵינָם לִהְיוֹת דָּמָיו אֲסוּרִין כִּדְמֵי יַיִן שֶׁנִּתְנַסֵּךְ לְעַכּוּ"ם. לְפִיכָךְ עַכּוּ"ם שֶׁשָּׂכַר אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל לַעֲשׂוֹת עִמּוֹ בְּיַיִן שְׂכָרוֹ אָסוּר:

We already explained, 7:9 and Hilchot Ishut 5:2. that whenever it is forbidden to benefit from a substance, if one transgresses and sells it, it is permitted [to make use of] the money with the exception of false deities, their accessories, offerings made to them, and wine poured as a libation to it. Our Sages were stringent with regard to ordinary gentile wine [and ruled that] money given for it is forbidden like money given for wined poured as a libation to a false deity.Accordingly, when a gentile hires a Jew to work with him with wine, his wages are forbidden.

וְכֵן הַשּׂוֹכֵר אֶת הַחֲמוֹר לְהָבִיא עָלָיו יַיִן אוֹ שֶׁשָּׂכַר סְפִינָה לְהָבִיא בָּהּ יַיִן שְׂכָרָן אָסוּר. אִם מָעוֹת נָתְנוּ לוֹ יוֹלִיכֵן לְיָם הַמֶּלַח. וְאִם נָתְנוּ לוֹ בִּשְׂכָרוֹ כְּסוּת אוֹ כֵּלִים אוֹ פֵּרוֹת הֲרֵי זֶה יִשְׂרֹף אוֹתָן וְיִקְבֹּר הָאֵפֶר כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא לֵהָנוֹת בּוֹ:

Similarly, when a person rents a donkey or a boat to transport wine, the payment for them is forbidden. If he gave him money, he should bring them to the Dead Sea. If he gave him clothes, utensils, or produce as payment, he should burn it and bury the dust so that he does not benefit from it.

שָׂכַר לָעַכּוּ"ם חֲמוֹר לִרְכֹּב עָלָיו וְהִנִּיחַ עָלָיו לוֹגִין שֶׁל יַיִן שְׂכָרוֹ מֻתָּר. שְׂכָרוֹ לְשַׁבֵּר כַּדֵּי יֵין נֶסֶךְ שְׂכָרוֹ מֻתָּר וְתָבוֹא עָלָיו בְּרָכָה מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמְּמַעֵט בְּתִפְלָה:

If a gentile rented a donkey to ride and placed containers of wine on it, the rental fee for the donkey is permitted. (Yoreh De'ah 133:3). The Radbaz emphasizes that this leniency applies when the donkey was rented primarily for human transport and, by the way, the gentile placed wine upon it. If, however, he rented it primarily to transport packages - and later the owner discovered that wine was included among them - the rental fee is forbidden even if the person also rides on the donkey. If [a gentile] hires a Jew to break barrels of wine used as a libation, his fee is permitted. May he be blessed because he eliminated obscenity.

הַשּׂוֹכֵר אֶת הַפּוֹעֵל וְאָמַר לוֹ הַעֲבֵר לִי מֵאָה חָבִיּוֹת שֶׁל שֵׁכָר בְּמֵאָה פְּרוּטוֹת וְנִמְצָא אַחַת מֵהֶן יַיִן שְׂכָרוֹ כֻּלּוֹ אָסוּר:

When a person hires a worker and tells him: "Transport 100 barrels of beer for me for 100 p'rutot," and it is discovered that one of them is [gentile] wine, his entire wage is forbidden. 65a). Accordingly, the payment for transporting the beer was never distinct from that of the wine. Hence his entire wage is forbidden.The Ra'avad differs and maintains that it is sufficient to destroy the wage paid for the forbidden barrels. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 133:3) follows the Rambam's stringency.

אָמַר לוֹ הַעֲבֵר לִי חָבִית בִּפְרוּטָה חָבִית בִּפְרוּטָה וְהֶעֱבִיר וְנִמְצָא בֵּינֵיהֶן חָבִיּוֹת שֶׁל יַיִן. שְׂכַר חָבִיּוֹת שֶׁל יַיִן אָסוּר וּשְׁאָר שְׂכָרוֹ מֻתָּר:

If he told him: "Transport barrels for me at a p'rutah each," and he transported them and barrels of wine were discovered among them, the wage for the barrels of wine is forbidden. The remainder of the wage is permitted. (loc. cit.)].

אֻמְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁשָּׁלַח לָהֶם עַכּוּ"ם חָבִית שֶׁל יַיִן בִּשְׂכָרָן מֻתָּר שֶׁיֹּאמְרוּ לוֹ תֵּן לָנוּ אֶת דָּמֶיהָ. וְאִם מִשֶּׁנִּכְנְסָה לִרְשׁוּתָן אָסוּר:

When a gentile sends Jewish craftsmen a barrel of wine as part of their wages, it is permitted for them to tell him: "Give us its worth." Once it enters their domain, it is forbidden. 132:3) writes that in the present age, (when gentiles are not actually idolaters,) a worker may return the barrel of wine even though it has entered his domain.

יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁהָיָה נוֹשֶׁה בְּעַכּוּ"ם מָנֶה. הָלַךְ הָעַכּוּ"ם וּמָכַר עַבוֹדָה זָרָה וְיֵין נֶסֶךְ וְהֵבִיא לוֹ דְּמֵיהֶן הֲרֵי זֶה מֻתָּר. וְאִם אָמַר לוֹ קֹדֶם שֶׁיִּמְכֹּר הַמְתֵּן לִי עַד שֶׁאֶמְכֹּר עַבוֹדָה זָרָה אוֹ יֵין נֶסֶךְ שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִי וְאָבִיא לְךָ. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא סְתַם יֵינוֹ. וּמָכַר וְהֵבִיא לוֹ הֲרֵי זֶה אָסוּר. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַיִּשְׂרְאֵלִי רוֹצֶה בְּקִיּוּמוֹ כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּפְרַע מִמֶּנּוּ חוֹבוֹ:

When a gentile owed a Jew a maneh,. it is permitted for the gentile to sell a false deity and wine that had been poured as a libation and bring him the money. If, before he sells them, he tells [the Jew]: "Wait until I sell the false deity or libation wine that I own and [then] I will bring you [the money]," if he sells it and brings [the money] to him, [the money] is forbidden. [This applies] even with regard to ordinary gentile wine. [The rationale is that] the Jew desires that [the false deity or the wine] to continue to exist so that he will be able to pay him his debt. 132:7) states that, even if the Jew desires that the false deity continue to exist, leniency can be granted in an instance where the gentile has other resources to pay the debt or alternatively, when the debt is secured by a guarantor. Moreover, if all that is concerned is ordinary gentile wine, in the present age, there is no prohibition for the reason stated above.

וְכֵן גֵּר וְעַכּוּ"ם שֶׁהָיוּ שֻׁתָּפִין וּבָאוּ לַחֲלֹק. אֵין הַגֵּר יָכוֹל לוֹמַר לָעַכּוּ"ם טֹל אַתָּה עַבוֹדָה זָרָה וַאֲנִי מָעוֹת. אַתָּה יַיִן וַאֲנִי פֵּרוֹת שֶׁהֲרֵי רוֹצֶה בְּקִיּוּמָן כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּטּל כְּנֶגְדָּן. אֲבָל גֵּר וְעַכּוּ"ם שֶׁיָּרְשׁוּ אֶת אֲבִיהֶן עַכּוּ"ם יָכוֹל לוֹמַר לוֹ טֹל אַתָּה עַבוֹדָה זָרָה וַאֲנִי מָעוֹת. אַתָּה יַיִן וַאֲנִי שֶׁמֶן. קַל הוּא שֶׁהֵקֵלּוּ בִּירֻשַּׁת הַגֵּר כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יַחֲזֹר לְסוּרוֹ. וְאִם מִשֶּׁבָּאוּ לִרְשׁוּת הַגֵּר אָסוּר:

Similarly, when a convert and a gentile were partners and they came to divide the resources [of the partnership], the convert may not tell the gentile: "You take the false deity and I will take the money. You take the wine and I will take the produce." [The rationale is that] he desires that [the forbidden entities] continue to exist so that he will be able to receive something in exchange for them.When, by contrast, a convert and a gentile inherit the estate of their father who was a gentile, [the convert] may tell [the gentile]: "You take the false deity and I will take the money. You take the wine and I will take the oil." This is a leniency granted with regard to an estate inherited by a convert so that he will not return to his deviant ways. If [the forbidden entities] entered the domain of the convert, it is forbidden.

יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁמָּכַר יֵינוֹ לְעַכּוּ"ם פָּסַק עַד שֶׁלֹּא מָדַד לוֹ דָּמָיו מֻתָּרִין. שֶׁמִּשֶּׁפָּסַק סָמְכָה דַּעְתּוֹ וּמִשֶּׁמָּשַׁךְ קָנָה וְיֵין נֶסֶךְ אֵינוֹ נַעֲשֶׂה עַד שֶׁיִּגַּע בּוֹ. נִמְצָא בִּשְׁעַת מְכִירָה הָיָה מֻתָּר. מָדַד לוֹ עַד שֶׁלֹּא פָּסַק הַדָּמִים דָּמָיו אֲסוּרִין. שֶׁהֲרֵי לֹא סָמְכָה דַּעְתּוֹ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמָּשַׁךְ וְנִמְצָא כְּשֶׁנָּגַע עֲדַיִן לֹא סָמְכָה דַּעְתּוֹ לִקַּח וְנֶאֱסַר הַיַּיִן בִּנְגִיעָתוֹ וַהֲרֵי זֶה כְּמוֹכֵר סְתַם יֵינָם:

[The following rules apply when] a Jew sells his wine to a gentile. If he established a price before he measured out [the wine], the money is permitted. [The rationale is that] from the time a price was established, [the gentile] definitely agreed [to the purchase] and when he pulled [the wine] into his domain, he acquired it. of meshichah [see Maggid Mishneh, Hilchot Zechiyah UMatanah 1:14; Turei Zahav 132:4) and the money is considered as a loan which he owes the Jew.The Radbaz questions why the Rambam mentions meshichah, drawing the wine into his own domain. Seemingly, once a price was established and the wine was poured, the gentile acquires it whether or not he performs meshichah immediately. Conversely, if meshichah finalizes the transaction, seemingly as long as a price was set before meshichah, the wine should be permittedThe Kessef Mishneh explains that the Rambam is speaking according to the common practice. It was customary to establish a price either before measuring the wine or after meshichah. And it does not become [comparable to] wine offered as a libation until he touches it. Therefore at the time of sale, it was permitted.If he measured it out for him before he established a price, the money is forbidden. [The rationale is that the gentile] did not definitely agree [to the purchase], even though he pulled [the wine] into his domain. Thus at the time he touched [the wine], he had not definitely agreed to the purchase. Hence the wine becomes forbidden because of his touch and it is as if [the Jew] is selling gentile wine.

בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּשֶׁמָּדַד הַיִּשְׂרְאֵלִי לְכֵלָיו. אֲבָל אִם מָדַד לִכְלִי הָעַכּוּ"ם אוֹ לִכְלִי יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁבְּיַד הָעַכּוּ"ם צָרִיךְ לִקַּח אֶת הַדָּמִים וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִמְדֹּד. וְאִם מָדַד וְלֹא לָקַח דָּמִים אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁפָּסַק דָּמָיו אֲסוּרִים שֶׁמִּשֶּׁיַגִּיעַ לַכְּלִי נֶאֱסַר כִּסְתָם יֵינָם:

When does the above apply? When the Jew measured [the wine] into his own containers. If, however, he measured it into the gentile's containers or to a container belonging to a Jew in the gentile's possession, he must take the money,), Thus the gentile has paid for the wine before it entered his domain and became forbidden. before measuring out [the wine]. If he measured out [the wine,] but did not take the money, the money is forbidden even though he established a price. As soon as [the wine] enters [the gentile's] container, it is forbidden as ordinary gentile wine. explains that since the wine in the container the gentile is holding becomes forbidden, the wine the Jew is pouring also becomes forbidden, as stated above in Chapter 12, Halachah 12.

הַנּוֹתֵן דִּינָר לְחֶנְוָנִי עַכּוּ"ם וְאָמַר לְפוֹעֲלוֹ הָעַכּוּ"ם לֵךְ וּשְׁתֵה וֶאֱכל מִן הַחֶנְוָנִי וַאֲנִי מְחַשֵּׁב לוֹ הֲרֵי זֶה חוֹשֵׁשׁ שֶׁמָּא יִשְׁתֶּה יַיִן. שֶׁזֶּה כְּמִי שֶׁקָּנָה לוֹ יֵין נֶסֶךְ וְהִשְׁקָהוּ. וּכְנֶגֶד זֶה בִּשְׁבִיעִית אָסוּר כְּגוֹן שֶׁנָּתַן דִּינָר לְחֶנְוָנִי יִשְׂרָאֵל עַם הָאָרֶץ וְאָמַר לְפוֹעֲלוֹ הַיִּשְׂרְאֵלִי לֵךְ וֶאֱכל וַאֲנִי מְחַשֵּׁב לוֹ. וְאִם אָכַל הַפּוֹעֵל דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְעֵשָּׂר אָסוּר:

When [a Jewish employer] gives a dinar to a gentile storekeeper and tells his gentile employee: "Go, drink, and eat [on my account] from the storekeeper and I will settle the accounts with him," he must show concern lest [the employee] will drink wine. Thus it will be as if he purchased wine used as a libation and gave it to him.A similar arrangement with regard to the Sabbatical year 58b) mentions both produce from the Sabbatical year and untithed produce, because it is possible that a common person is lax in his observance of both these mitzvot. Apparently, the Rambam also had this intent because he begins by mentioning produce of the Sabbatical year and concludes by mentioning untithed produce. is also forbidden; i.e., one gives a dinar to a Jewish storekeeper who is a common person and tells his Jewish employee: "Go, drink, and eat [on my account] from the storekeeper and I will settle the accounts with him." If the worker eats food that was not tithed, it is forbidden.

אֲבָל אִם אָמַר לָהֶם אִכְלוּ וּשְׁתוּ בְּדִינָר זֶה. אוֹ שֶׁאָמַר לָהֶם אִכְלוּ וּשְׁתוּ עָלַי מִן הַחֶנְוָנִי וַאֲנִי פּוֹרֵעַ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּעְבֵּד הוֹאִיל וְלֹא נִתְיַחֵד שִׁעְבּוּדוֹ הֲרֵי זֶה מֻתָּר וְאֵינוֹ חוֹשֵׁשׁ לֹא מִשּׁוּם יֵין נֶסֶךְ וְלֹא מִשּׁוּם שְׁבִיעִית וְלֹא מִשּׁוּם מַעֲשֵׂר:

If, however, he told them: "Eat and drink the worth of this dinar," or "Eat and drink from the storekeeper on my account and I will pay him," this is permitted. Although the Jew becomes liable, his liability is not specifically related [to the foods from which the employees partake]. [Therefore,] he need not be concerned, not about wine used as a libation, not about produce of the Sabbatical year, nor about untithed produce. (Orach Chayim 450:6) mentions opinions that are more stringent with regard to an employer taking financial responsibility for the food a gentile will eat on Pesach. The Turei Zahav 460:4 explains that with regard to Pesach, there is a greater reason for stringency, for it is almost certain that the gentile will eat chametz. In the situations mentioned in our halachah, by contrast, it is possible that none of the prohibitions will be violated, for the gentile will not want wine, nor the Jewish workers, the untithed or Sabbatical produce.

מֶלֶךְ שֶׁהָיָה מְחַלֵּק יֵינוֹ לָעָם וְלוֹקֵחַ מֵהֶן דָּמָיו כְּפִי מַה שֶּׁיִּרְצֶה. אַל יֹאמַר אָדָם לְעַכּוּ"ם הֵא לְךָ מָאתַיִם זוּז וְהִכָּנֵס תַּחְתַּי בְּאוֹצַר הַמֶּלֶךְ כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּקַּח עַכּוּ"ם הַיַּיִן שֶׁכָּתְבוּ בְּשֵׁם יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיִתֵּן הָעַכּוּ"ם הַדָּמִים לַמֶּלֶךְ. אֲבָל אוֹמֵר לוֹ הֵא לְךָ מָאתַיִם זוּז וּמַלְּטֵנִי מִן הָאוֹצָר:

[The following rules apply when] a [gentile] king distributes his wine among the people and takes money for it, as he desires. 71a. It is quoted by the Rashba and other Rishonim. Rashi, the Ra'avad, and others, however, have different interpretations of the passage. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 132:6) quotes the Rambam's interpretation. A [Jew] may not tell a gentile: "Take 200 zuz and go into the king's storehouse in place of me," so that the gentile will take the wine designated for the Jew and give the money to the king. He may, however, tell him: "Here is 200 zuz for you. Save me from [going to] the storehouse."

עַכּוּ"ם שֶׁנָּגַע בְּיֵינוֹ שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל לְאָנְסוֹ מֻתָּר לִמְכֹּר אוֹתוֹ יַיִן לְאוֹתוֹ הָעַכּוּ"ם שֶׁאֲסָרוֹ לְבַדּוֹ. שֶׁכֵּיוָן שֶׁנִּתְכַּוֵּן זֶה הָעַכּוּ"ם לְהַזִּיקוֹ וְלֶאֱסֹר יֵינוֹ הֲרֵי זֶה כְּמוֹ שֶׁשְּׁבָרוֹ אוֹ שְׂרָפוֹ שֶׁחַיָּב לְשַׁלֵּם. וְנִמְצְאוּ הַדָּמִים שֶׁלּוֹקֵחַ מִמֶּנּוּ דְּמֵי הַהֶזֵּק וְלֹא דְּמֵי הַמְּכִירָה:

When a gentile touches 7:3 states, one is not liable for causing damage inadvertently.The Kessef Mishneh states that even if the gentile intentionally touched the wine, but did not know that by touching it, he caused it to be forbidden, the gentile is not liable and this leniency does not apply. The Siftei Cohen 132:2, however, interprets this wording as implying that even if the gentile caused it to become forbidden inadvertently, the Jew may sell it to him.See also Hilchot Chovel UMazik 7:4 and commentaries, where a similar concept is discussed. a Jew's wine against [the Jew's] will, it is permitted to sell that wine to that gentile alone. 124:2) rules that in the present age, when it is not customary for gentiles to use wine as libations, the wine may be sold to any gentile. [The rationale is] since that gentile wished to cause a Jew a loss [by] having his wine forbidden, it is as if he destroyed it or burnt it, in which instance, he would be obligated to pay. Thus the money [the Jew] takes from him is money for the loss and not money for a sale. 59b states that in such a situation, he may charge the gentile the full price of the wine.