ולרבא דלא שאני ליה מוקים ליה כתלתא תנאי

The Gemara comments: And according to Rava, who explains that the mishna with regard to wine used for libations is in accordance with one opinion whereas the mishna with regard to tithes is in accordance with another opinion, and he does not hold that the case of wine used for a libation is different, he interprets it as a dispute between three tanna’im.

מה שבבור אסור והשאר מותר אמר רב הונא לא שנו אלא שלא החזיר גרגותני לגת אבל החזיר גרגותני לגת אסור

§ The mishna teaches: Once the wine descends into the collection vat, that which is in the collection vat is prohibited, and the rest, which did not yet descend into the collection vat, is permitted. Rav Huna says: The mishna taught that the rest of the wine is permitted only in a case where he did not return the wicker basket [gargutni], which is used to strain the wine on the way to the vat, to the winepress. But if he returned the wicker basket to the winepress, even the wine remaining in the winepress is prohibited, as the wine in the basket renders the wine in the winepress forbidden.

גרגותני גופה במאי קא מיתסרא בנצוק שמע מינה נצוק חיבור כדתני רבי חייא שפחסתו צלוחיתו הכא נמי שפחסתו בורו

The Gemara asks: With regard to the wine in the wicker basket itself, in what manner is it rendered forbidden? Apparently, it is rendered forbidden by the stream of liquid that flows from the basket into the vat below, thereby connecting the wine in the basket to the forbidden wine in the vat. If so, conclude from Rav Huna’s statement that an uninterrupted stream of liquid is considered a connection. The Gemara rejects the inference: The reason for Rav Huna’s statement could be different, as Rabbi Ḥiyya teaches that if one fills a gentile’s flask through a funnel, the wine in the funnel is rendered forbidden in a case where the level of the wine in his flask rose and reached the funnel. Here too, Rav Huna is referring to a case where the level of the wine in his collection vat rose and reached the basket.

ההוא ינוקא דתנא עבודה זרה בשית שני בעו מיניה מהו לדרוך עם הנכרי בגת אמר להו דורכין עם הנכרי בגת והא קא מנסך בידיה דציירנא להו לידיה והא קא מנסך ברגל ניסוך דרגל לא שמיה ניסוך

§ The Gemara relates: There was a certain outstanding child who learned the tractate of Avoda Zara when he was six years old. People raised a dilemma to him: What is the halakha? Is it permitted to tread on grapes in the winepress together with the gentile? The child said to them: One may tread on grapes in the winepress together with the gentile, in accordance with the ruling of the mishna. They asked the child: But doesn’t the gentile render the wine a libation by touching it with his hands, rendering it forbidden? If so, how may a Jew derive benefit from the wine by receiving payment for his work? The child replied: It is permitted in a case where we tie his hands so that he cannot pour the wine as a libation. The child was then asked: But doesn’t the gentile render the wine a libation by touching it with his foot? The child replied: Rendering wine a libation by touching it with one’s foot is not considered rendering it a libation.

ההוא עובדא דהוה בנהרדעא דדשו ישראל וגוי לההוא חמרא ושהייה שמואל תלתא ריגלי מאי טעמא אילימא משום דקסבר

The Gemara relates: There was a certain incident in Neharde’a in which a Jew and a gentile trod on grapes and produced a certain wine together, and Shmuel delayed ruling on the matter for three Festivals, as the Sages gathered during the Festivals and presented Shmuel with the opportunity to clarify the matter with them. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that Shmuel delayed his ruling? If we say that Shmuel delayed ruling on the matter because he thought to him self: