Commentary for Kiddushin 157:17

אדרבה העמד יין על חזקתו ואימר לא החמיץ הרי החמיץ לפניך הכא נמי הרי היא בוגרת לפנינו השתא הוא דבגרה (הכא) נמי השתא הוא דאחמיץ

and then it was found to be acid:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This Tanna regards wine and acid as two different commodities, and one cannot be terumah for the other.');">²⁴</span> for full three days it is certain; there after it is doubtful.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The meaning is disputed in B.B. 96a, two views being stated, (i) For the first three days after the last examination before the present one it was certainly wine, and any separation made then is valid. Afterwards it is doubtful; hence on the one hand, another separation must be made; on the other, what was already separated is forbidden to a lay Israelite, as it may still have been wine, (ii) For three days before this present examination it was certainly acid, and any separation made then is invalid. But before that it is doubtful, as explained in (i) ; for fuller notes v. B.B.');">²⁵</span>

Explore commentary for Kiddushin 157:17. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.