Is it permitted to put brine or fish stew in the wineskins ab initio, or is the substance permitted only after the fact? The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a resolution to the dilemma, as Rav Zevid bar Oshaya teaches: With regard to one who purchases jugs from gentiles, if they are new, he may place wine in them, and if they are old, he may place brine and fish stew in them ab initio.

§ The Gemara discusses the effect of fire on prohibited vessels. Rabbi Yehuda Nesia raised a dilemma before Rabbi Ami: If one returned prohibited containers to the furnace and they whitened due to its heat, what is the halakha? Is the fire assumed to expunge the absorbed wine or not? Rabbi Ami said to him: If brine burns away the wine, all the more so is it not clear that fire does as well? It was also stated that Rabbi Yoḥanan says, and some say Rabbi Asi says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: With regard to jugs belonging to gentiles that one returned to the furnace, once their tar has disintegrated they are permitted.

Rav Ashi said: Do not say that the jugs must stay in the furnace until the tar falls apart entirely; rather, even if it only softens, the jug is permitted, despite the fact that the tar did not fall off. The Gemara adds: With regard to a situation in which the tar was removed by dropping ignited splinters of wood [kinsa] into the jug, Rav Aḥa and Ravina disagree: One deemed the jug prohibited, and one deemed it permitted. The Gemara adds: And the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of the one who deemed it prohibited.

The Gemara discusses the halakha with regard to beer kept in a prohibited vessel. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: What is the halakha with regard to putting beer in it? Rav Naḥman and Rav Yehuda prohibited this, and Rava permitted it. The Gemara notes that Ravina permitted Rav Ḥiyya, son of Rav Yitzḥak, to pour beer into such a jug, but he went and poured wine into it instead. And even so, Ravina was not concerned over the matter, as he said to himself: It is merely an incidental occurrence. The fact that Rav Ḥiyya mistakenly poured wine into the jug instead of beer is not a reason to prohibit filling it with beer in general.

§ The Gemara discusses different vessels and the halakhot that pertain to them. Rav Yitzḥak bar Bisna had certain vessels made of cow dung [defakosna] that had contained wine of gentiles, which he filled with water and placed in the sun in order to rid them of the forbidden substance they had absorbed. As a result, they burst. Rabbi Abba then said to him in jest: You have rendered them prohibited to you forever, i.e., you have destroyed them completely. You may say that the Sages said that one should fill the containers with water, but did anyone say that you should place them in the sun?

Rabbi Yusna says that Rabbi Ami says: A natron vessel has no ritual purification, i.e., it cannot be rendered suitable for use, ever. The reason is that this material is highly absorbent. The Gemara asks: What is a natron vessel? Rabbi Yosei bar Avin says: It is a vessel crafted from the excavation of alum powder.

The Gemara relates that an individual named Parzak, from house of the vizier [rofila], seized certain vessels from Jews of Pumbedita, placed wine of gentiles in them, and later returned the containers to them. They went and asked Rav Yehuda for a halakhic ruling on this matter. Rav Yehuda said: This vessel is an item that is not brought into storage for preservation. Accordingly, one may simply scrub such vessels in water, and they are permitted.

Rav Avira said: With regard to these dark brown Aramean jugs, since they do not absorb substances well, one need only scrub them in water and they are permitted. Rav Pappi likewise said: With regard to these earthenware vessels from Bei Mikhsei, since they do not absorb substances well, one need only scrub them in water, and they are permitted.

The Gemara continues: The halakha with regard to cups, which hold wine only temporarily, is subject to a dispute: Rav Asi prohibited them, and Rav Ashi permitted them. The Gemara comments: If a gentile drank from a cup for the first time, i.e., it had never been used before, everyone agrees that it is prohibited, as a new cup absorbs a great deal of wine in its first usage. They disagree when it is being used for a second time, i.e., the cup has already absorbed a permitted liquid, and therefore its capacity to absorb the gentile’s wine is impaired.

And there are those who say: If the cup is used for the first or the second time by a gentile, everyone agrees that it is prohibited. They disagree when it is being used for the third time. And the halakha is that a cup used for the first or the second time by a gentile is rendered prohibited, but with regard to the third time, it is permitted.

Rav Zevid said: With regard to these glazed earthenware vessels, white and black ones are permitted. Green ones are prohibited, because they contain alum, which absorbs liquids well. And if any of these vessels have cracks in them, they are all prohibited. Mareimar taught: Glazed earthenware [kunya] is permitted, whether it is black or white or green, because the coating impairs the capacity of the container to absorb liquids.

The Gemara asks: In what way is this case different from the case of leavened bread on Passover, which is also absorbed? The Gemara explains its question: As they once asked Mareimar: With regard to these glazed earthenware vessels, what is the halakha concerning using them on Passover? The Gemara interjects: With regard to green earthenware, do not raise the dilemma, as it contains alum and as a result absorbs leaven well, and it is therefore prohibited. Rather, let the dilemma be raised with regard to white and black earthenware. What is the halakha?

The Gemara qualifies the question further: Where they have cracks in them, do not raise the dilemma, as they certainly absorb that which was placed in them and are therefore prohibited. Rather, let the dilemma be raised where they are perfectly smooth: What is the halakha in such a case? Mareimar said