Beitzah — Daf 38b

הרי שנתערב לו קב חטין בעשרה קבין חטין של חבירו יאכל הלה וחדי אחיכו עליה אמר להו גולתיכו שקלי הדור אחיכו עליה

אמר רב אושעיא שפיר עבוד דאחיכו עליה מאי שנא חטין בשעורים דלא קאמר להו דהוה ליה מין בשאינו מינו ומין בשאינו מינו בטיל חטין בחיטין נמי נהי דלרבי יהודה לא בטיל לרבנן מבטל בטיל

אמר ליה רב ספרא משה שפיר קאמרת ולא שמיע להו הא דאמר רבי חייא קטוספאה משמיה דרב הבורר צרורות מגרנו של חברו חייב לשלם לו דמי חטים

אלמא כילא חסריה הכא נמי כילא חסריה

א"ל אביי ולא שני ליה למר בין ממון שיש לו תובעין לממון שאין לו תובעין

א"ל וליטעמיך הא דאמר רב חסדא נבלה בטלה בשחוטה לפי שאי אפשר לשחוטה שתעשה נבלה

שחוטה אינה בטל' בנבלה לפי שאפשר לנבלה שתעשה שחוט'

הכי נמי דכי אית לה בעלים לא בטלה וכי תימא הכי נמי והא תניא א"ר יוחנן בן נורי חפצי הפקר קונין שביתה אע"פ שאין להם בעלים דומין כמי שיש להם בעלים

א"ל מי קא מדמית איסורא לממונא איסורא בטיל ממונא לא בטיל

וטעמא מאי

אביי אמר גזרה שמא תעשה עיסה בשותפות

רבא אמר תבלין לטעמ' עבידי וטעמ' לא בטיל

If one kab of wheat of one person got mixed up with ten kabs of wheat of another, should the latter eat and be happy?1 They laughed at him. Said he to them: Have I taken away your coats [that you laugh at me]?2 They again laughed at him. Said R. Oshaia: They were right in laughing at him. Why did he not say to them [as an example] of a case of wheat that got mixed up with barley? Because they are of different kinds, and in a mixture of different kinds the rule of neutralization takes effect; then the same is true of wheat that got mixed up with wheat: granted that according to R. Judah it does not become neutralized, but according to the Rabbis it indeed becomes neutralized.3 R. Safra said to him:4 By Moses!5 Is it well what you say?6 Did they not hear what R. Hiyya of Ktesifon7 said in the name of Rab: If one picks out pebbles from his neighbour's threshing floor he must pay him the value of wheat.8 Consequently [it is because] he lessened the measure [of his wheat];9 likewise in this case he has lessened the quantity.10 Said Abaye to him: Does not the Master make a distinction between money which is being claimed and money which is not being claimed?11 — He replied to him: And according to your opinion, that which R. Hisda said: Nebelah12 is neutralized in ritually slaughtered meat,13 because the slaughtered cannot assume the character of nebelah,14 but ritually slaughtered meat is not neutralized in nebelah, because nebelah can assume the character of ritually slaughtered meat.15 Would you likewise [assume that], if it16 has an owner, it does not become neutralized? And if you say it is even so, surely it was taught: R. Johanan b. Nuri said: Ownerless articles acquire their [Sabbath] rest;17 although they had no owner, it is the same as if they had an owner!18 — He replied to him: [Still]19 can you compare the case of a ritual prohibition with a monetary case! In the case of a ritual prohibition, it [the less] is neutralized [in the majority]; but with respect to a monetary case, it is not neutralized [in the majority]. What is now the reason?20 Abaye says: It is a preventive measure lest the dough be made in partnership.21 Raba says: Condiments are used for seasoning and whatever is used for seasoning does not become neutralized.22 less. Hence if the pebbles, which have no intrinsic value, can nevertheless not be disregarded, surely we cannot disregard the water and the salt. loss has been inflicted upon him. In the Mishnah no such claim is made on the Festival, therefore owing to their lesser value the salt and the water may well be disregarded. touched by one of these three is not unclean, for we assume that contact has taken place with one of the pieces of the ritually slaughtered animal. an ‘erub, for that would be beyond two thousand cubits. movements on Sabbaths and Festivals. presented by our Mishnah still remains. are concerned merely with a matter of ritual prohibition — moving beyond the tehum.