May I regift non-Kosher wine?
A Jew who receives a gift of non-Kosher wine may wish to pass it on to a non-Jewish colleague, employee or neighbor. In addition to the general restriction to giving gifts to non-Jews (beyond the scope of this discussion), there are additional halachic issues with gifting wine.
In early halachic history the concern of non-Jewish wine was a major one: There is an issur d’oraisa (Biblical prohibition) of consuming or benefiting (hana’ah) from wine that is yayin nesech (wine poured [for idol worship]). There is the additional issur of sechorah (doing business) with non-kosher substances. Since halachah states that matanah k’mecher (a gift is like a sale)—gifting non-Kosher wine to a non-Jew is comparable to selling it.
However, the prohibition of selling (or gifting) non-Kosher edibles is limited to foods that are an issur d’oraisa—so it applies specifically to wine that was produced (and poured) for idol-worship. These practices are nearly obsolete; the vast majority of non-Jews involved in wine production are not idol worshippers who pour libations, and their wine is not yayin nesech.
Wine produced by non-Jews is still restricted mid’rabbanan (Rabbinically) as stam yainam ([non-Jewish] plain wine). Even if the wine may contain non-kosher ingredients, these would usually be batel (nullified) strictly min haTorah (by Biblical standards)—making the wine non-Kosher only mid’rabbanan. The majority of halachic authorities maintain that stam yainam is therefore excluded from the rule that prohibits sechorah. Nevertheless, there are poskim who argue that stam yainam should be bound by the issur of sechorah despite its d’rabbanan status. They consider stam yainam more serious than other Rabbinic prohibitions, either due to the gravity of the original issur, or for other reasons.
But there is another exception: an acquisition that was not pre-planned but nizdamnu lo (occurred by chance) is not considered doing business, and would apply to receiving a surprise gift of non-kosher wine. Regifting it is therefore not a “transaction” (the issur of sechorah); however, it would still be considered having hana’ah.
Halachah rules more strictly with the issue of hana’ah, and maintains that it is generally assur to benefit even from stam yainam. Sefardim are scrupulous regarding this, with Ashkenazi poskim being more lenient b’dieved (ex post facto) when dealing with hefsed (monetary loss), especially with an expensive vintage. A ba’al nefesh (scrupulous individual) is careful to avoid the issur of hana’ah regardless.
?????? ??? ?? ??? ?????....
?????? ????? ??????, ???? ?????? ?????? ??????? ???????. ??? ????? ??? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ????? ?????? ????? ???? ????, ??? ????? ??????? ?? ???? ??? ????? ????? ???? ????, ?? ???? ????? ?????.
???? ?? ????? ????? ??? ?????? ????? ???? ???? ??? ???? ????, ????? ???? ?????? ??? ????? ?????, ???? ???? ????? ????? ??????? ???? ???? ???? ?????. ???? ???? ??????, ???????? ???????? ????? ?????, ??? ?? ??????? ??? ?????. ?????? ?????? ??????, ?????? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ????. ??? ???? ??? ????? ?????? ????? ??, ? ??? ????. ???? ????? ????? ?????? ?????. ???? ?? ?????.
????, ????? ?? ????? ?????? ???? ???? - ?? ???? ?? ???? ?????? ???? ??????? ??? ???. ?????? ????? ???? ??. ???? ??. ???? ?????? ???? ????? ???? ??? ???? ??? ????? ???? ??? ???? ????? ???. ???? ??????? ??? ??? ?? ???? ??? 161 ????? ????? ?? ?????.