Here we’ll have more machlokot (disputes) between Hachamim (the Sages) and Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel about a situation where kosher (ritually permissible) wine was left with an idol worshiper, and the Jew left. He wasn’t with him.
The Mishnah says: The Jew is traveling with an idol worshiper, and he leaves his wine, which is in sealed barrels. He leaves it in the wagon or in the boat, and he goes off on a little excursion, a very short distance away. But then he extends that trip. He goes into the city, and eventually goes and takes a bath over there. We say mutar (permitted). The wine is permitted, even though the Jew was away for a long time, since he was in very close proximity to the ship. The idol worshiper had no clue when the Jew would show back up or how long he would stay away. Therefore, the idol worshiper was afraid to tamper with the wine, and the wine remains permitted.
But if the Jew informed the idol worshiper that he was going to be far away—that he wasn’t going a short distance away, but a long distance away—then the wine is prohibited if the Jew stayed away long enough for the idol worshiper to make a hole in the barrel, seal that hole, and then allow it to dry before the Jew returned. The idol worshiper here knew that the Jew was going to be far away, so he could do whatever he wanted. He wasn’t afraid to tamper with the wine because once the Jew got back, he would be able to hide any evidence of what he did. Therefore, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says, there’s no fear on the part of the idol worshiper: the wine is forbidden only if the Jew was away long enough for the idol worshiper to open the seal, make a new seal, and allow it to dry. That’s an extended period. That’s longer than the idol worshiper opinion of Hachamim. So there’s a longer time that he would have to be away in order to make the wine prohibited. Rashbag would say that there is more fear on the part of the idol worshiper, since he has to really seal up all the evidence fully.
Another similar case: If a Jew leaves an idol worshiper alone in his store, where there was kosher wine, even though the Jew was going in and out many times, he wasn’t watching the store at all times. The wine is mutar. The wine in the store is still permitted. The idol worshiper wasn’t told how long the Jew was going to be out, and therefore he would have been afraid to play with or touch the wine. But if the idol worshiper was informed that the Jew was going to be away for a while, then the wine is prohibited if the Jew stayed away long enough for the idol worshiper to make a hole in the barrel, seal that hole, and then allow it to dry. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel omer (says): The wine is only prohibited if the Jew stayed away long enough for the idol worshiper to open the seal, make a new seal, and allow it to dry.
So we have three very similar cases in these last two Mishnayot. The first one was people moving barrels together, a Jew and a non-Jew, with barrels of wine. The second one was traveling on a boat or a wagon, and the Jew left the idol worshiper alone. The third case was in a Jew’s store, where the Jew left the idol worshiper alone with the wine. The Bartenura goes through these different cases, and he says that each one of them teaches us a little bit of a nuance, a little bit of a hiddush (nuance) that we wouldn’t have known if we didn’t have all of these cases.
This last case, with the store, is needed. We need to state it with all its detail, because someone may think, “You know what? If it’s in a store, there’s the ability to lock the door when the Jew is out, so the idol worshiper would not have any fear about playing with the wine or doing something to it. Therefore, it would all be a problem, no matter how far he went.” That’s the ka mashma lan (this teaches us). We say, no, if he only went a close distance away, things would still be okay. Or if he was yotzei venichnas, if he was going back and forth, it would be okay. It’s the same with the case of the wagon: we want to show that we’re not concerned that we may think, “Oh, when it comes to a wagon, the idol worshiper could have moved it to a distant spot. Since it’s movable, maybe he went somewhere else, opened up the wine, and then it came back to its current spot.” Ka mashma lan. No, these are the different ways to look at the Mishnah. All of these cases are needed in order to teach us the different nuances that would still apply, to tell us that the wine in every one of these cases would still be kosher, even though the Jew wasn’t with it at all times.