Commentary for Shabbat 283:20

ומי סבר ליה כוותיה

R. Eliezer said: It creates a [forbidden] mixture as though it were certain <i>terumah</i>,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. as though it were all terumah and therefore it can only be neutralized by a hundred times its quantity. Thus he regards the terumah as distinct. ');">¹⁹</span> but the Sages maintain: The mixture creates a [forbidden] mixture only in proportion.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., if a se'ah of terumah falls into nine se'ahs of hullin in the first place, and then a se'ah of the mixture falls into another heap of produce, this second se'ah is regarded as containing one tenth of a se'ah of terumah only, and if the second pile contains ten se'ahs it neutralizes it. ');">²⁰</span> [But] say that you know him [to rule thus] with stringency; do you know him [to rule thus] with lenience?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As in our Mishnah, where this view would result in greater lenience. ');">²¹</span> — Rather [reply thus]: He [R. Judah] rules as R. Simeon, as we learnt: If a <i>se'ah</i> of <i>terumah</i> falls into a hundred,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence it is neutralized, but that one se'ah of the whole must be removed. ');">²²</span> and one has no time to remove [it] until another falls in, it is [all] forbidden;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since here are now two se'ahs of terumah in one hundred of hullin. ');">²³</span> but R. Simeon permits it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is now assumed that his reason is because he regards the first se'ah as lying distinct and apart, and therefore the second se'ah alone is counted, and that too is neutralized. ');">²⁴</span> Yet how [does this follow]? Perhaps there they differ in this: viz., the first Tanna holds: Though they fell in consecutively it is as though they fell in simultaneously, so that each falls into fifty; whereas R. Simeon holds: The first is neutralized in the hundred, and this one is neutralized in a hundred and one?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence on the contrary, instead of regarding the terumah as a thing apart, he maintains that it becomes entirely one with the hullin. ');">²⁵</span> — Rather [reply thus]: He [R. Judah] rules as R. Simeon b. Eleazar. For it was taught, R. Simeon b. Eleazar said: One may cast his eyes at one side and eat from the other.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., he may decide to remove a se'ah from one side of the pile and then, without actually removing it, eat from the other. Thus the removing is not essential. ');">²⁶</span> Yet does he agree with him?

Explore commentary for Shabbat 283:20. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.