Chullin

It is different with the case of a separate entity. 1 AND SO IT IS WITH A PIECE OF NEBELAH etc. Why is it not neutralized in the larger quantity [of the other substances in the mixture]? Now this is well according to him who says that the expression ‘whatsoever one is wont to count’2 was used;3 but according to him who says that the expression ‘[only] that which one is wont to count’4 was used, what shall we say? — It is different with a whole piece since it is suitable to be offered to guests.5 Now both cases were necessary to be stated [in the Mishnah]. For if we were taught only the case of the [sciatic] nerve, [we should have said that it is not neutralized] because it is a specific entity, but this is not so with the case of a piece [of meat]; and if we were taught the case of a piece [of meat we should have said that it is not neutralized] because it is a piece suitable to be offered to guests, but this is not so with the case of the [sciatic] nerve. Therefore both cases were necessary [to be stated]. Rabbah b. Bar Hana stated in a public lecture: A piece of nebelah6 or a piece of an unclean fish6 will not render forbidden [the mixture in which it is] until it imparts a flavour to the broth, in the sediments and in the pieces [of the stew]. Rab thereupon appointed an Amora7 who stated as follows: As soon as it [the piece of nebelah] imparted its flavour to one piece that piece8 itself is rendered [forbidden] like nebelah,9 and it8 in turn renders all the other pieces forbidden10 for they are of like kind. R. Safra said to Abaye. Consider, Rab's ruling agrees, does it not, with the opinion of R. Judah who maintained that homogeneous substances cannot neutralize each other [in a mixture]? Why then [does he declare], ‘As soon as it imparted its flavour’? Surely even if it did not impart any flavour to it8 it would also [render the entire contents of the pot forbidden]?11 — He replied: We are dealing here with the case where he straightway removed it.12 Raba replied, man might sell them by weight or by bulk too, are not neutralized in any quantity. Pieces of meat, too, a man might sell by number, and therefore would come within the category of substances which do not become neutralized in a larger quantity. case of objects which are regarded as of sufficiently high commercial value to be sold in units rather than in bulk. According to the latter teaching neutralization is permitted in all cases except those where the objects are of such high value as not to be sold save by counting single units. Those things, however, which are sold by weight as well as by number would be neutralized in the larger mixture, v. Yeb. (Sonc. ed.) p. 551, n. 11. The question therefore remains, why is not the piece of nebelah neutralized in the larger mixture? flavour that exuded from it. popular style the main points of the discourse given to him by the latter. piece which was nearest the piece of nebelah and which therefore absorbed most of the essence of the latter. next to it. only one piece. If this piece therefore which remained contains the flavour of the nebelah, it is then regarded as nebelah itself and will render forbidden the pieces which are subsequently put in with it.