Here, in the time of danger itself, there is no way for the Gentile to go to prison, as explained in Yod C. Kecht CB regarding the time of war and in the RMA there C. I. and Shekh Skkatt in the name of the Ribash C. Tachd regarding a thief, therefore the wine that was at the time The fire itself is not a concern if it was...!trpsttrp-gettext data-trpgettextoriginal=9739!trpenRead more!trpst/trp-gettext!trpen
Here, in the time of danger itself, there is no way for the Gentile to go to prison, as explained in Yod C. Kecht CB regarding the time of war and in the RMA there C. I. and Sh. The fire itself is not a concern if there was a real danger through people not to linger for nothing in such places.
But if, after the danger had passed, the fire department was still in the house at a time when the Israelite was not allowed to return until the safety of the apartment was ascertained as usual, in this way the wine is prohibited, since the Israeli went out and sailed and the foreigner knows that he sailed, and in this way the foreigner is suspected of drinking as explained in the above-mentioned C. A.
And even if the place is still defined from a security point of view as a dangerous place after a fire, it is not a definition of danger that says that it is not an encampment because the reality proves that the firefighters are not busy and panicked to run away like in wartime or like a thief who is only told that they are not free to encamp, but in a place where, according to reality, the Gentile may linger And to delay without a clear reason is certainly not considered a place of danger for this matter.