Hot answers tagged bitul-batel-null
Hacham Ovadia Yosef discusses this issue in Yabia Omer Helek 7 Siman 44 in terms of the kinneret, which supplies water for most of israel. Kibbutzim along the coast are KNOWN for dumping hametz into the water. He answers that hametz dumped before pesach is nullified in 60. During pesach, he applies the concept of "tzonen bitzonen". Since the hametz and water ...
It is subject to current societal standards. Aruch HaShulchan YD 101:21: כבר נתבאר דחה"ל תלוי לפי המקום ולפי הזמן והכל לפי ראות עיני המורה It has already been explained that chaticha hare'uya lehischabed depends on the place and the time, and it all goes according to the way it appears before the [particular] rabbi. An important aside, the ...
It's debated by the posekim. In Yoreh De'ah 110:7 the Mechaber says that "if a דבר שיש לו מתירין is mixed up with others, and then one of them was eaten inadvertently... all of the other ones are permitted, since we can assume that the issur is gone" - though he then goes on to say that there are some restrictions, to lessen the chances of eating the ...
R' Shneur Zalman of Liadi writes (Orach Chaim 467:48): מי שרוצה לשאוב בפסח מבארות של נכרים או מבארות של ישראל שלא נזהר בהן מחמץ כל השנה, טוב שיסנן המים בבגד נקי בכל פעם ששואב. אבל מעיקר הדין אין מחזיקין איסור מספק. "One who wants to draw water on Pesach from wells owned by non-Jews, or by Jews but with which they weren't careful to ...
Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach ruled that while yes, we say "chametz is not nullified even 1/1000", but a few pieces of bread in the ocean are so far past the mark that they become nullified. So somewhere between one-in-a-thousand and one-in-a-quintillion (approximate volume of the Mediterranean in gallons).
A few reasons that come to mind: The taam of chametz may be absorbed in the utensils used to manufacture that product, and likely there will not be shishim to nullify that taam. There may be minuscule amounts of chametz that need not be listed on the label or are included in the generic "natural/artificial flavors", but which are significant due to their ...
There are really two types of Bittul (nullification): Min BeMino - a mixture of the same types of food. In this case the prohibited substance (the 'issur') is batel (nullified) if it is in the minority (rov). The rabbis enacted a restriction (gezeira) not to eat the mixture until the issur is less than one 60th of the total (shishim). Min BeSheEino Mino - ...
According to the Sdei Chemed, this question dates back to the Pri Megadim (Yoreh Deah 62) who has a safek about whether bittul helps for ever min ha-chai to a ben noach. Subsequently, this became a popular topic of debate, and the Sdei Chemed records many acharonim on each side of the issue.
To quote myself: The answer, explains the Ra'avad (quoted by the Rashba to Chullin 89b ד"ה אמר), is as follows: כי אמרינן חד בתרי בטיל מדאורייתא דוקא דקיימא איסורא באפי נפשה והיתירא באפי נפשיה כגון גיד בין הגידים וביצה בין הבצים שההיתר לא קיבל טעם מן האיסור, וכיון דאיסורא לא מנכרא בטל ברוב, אבל כשקבל ההיתר טעם האיסור נעשה הכל ...
Sometimes rov is enough and other times we require shishim. See this chart for details but basically the only case l'halacha we will rely on rov is if no taste is transferred (yavesh byavesh) and taste the same (min bmino).
Tosafos on the g'mara that is the source of this discussion (Chulin 100a) says that even if this criterion is not always objective, there are objective (dis)qualifications, such as isur. If eating the food in question is prohibited it is automatically not ra'ui l'hiskabed.
The Shulchan Aruch (YD 109:1) rules in accordance with the Rashba who says you may only eat them one after another, but not at the same time. It should be understood, however, that we are only discussing things which do not fall into the category of חתיכה הראויה להתכבד. For specifics see YD 101.
I asked my LOR and he showed me the mishnah in trumos (Perek 5 Mishnah 8) which is the original source of the machlokes. If 1 piece of chulin falls into a 100 pieces of chulin, it is batel. If a second piece of trumah falls in, then there is a machlokes as to whether it was now considered 2 in a 100 (1 in 50) and asur or 1 in 101 and batel again. This ...
Afraid I don't have a source off-hand, but my strong sense from how it's addressed in Shulchan Aruch is that no, that's not davar hama'amid. The examples are something like an enzyme that cause a near-instant significant change in the product. You can't pretend the non-kosher rennet isn't there when if it wasn't, this wouldn't look anything like cheese! ...
R' Blumenkranz in his Pesach Guide discusses homeopathic solutions, and is mattir based on them statistically not containing a single molecule. So according to him, a single molecule constitutes mashehu. E.g. mashehu chametz on pesach of table vinegar is 9.58×10-44 oz, considering only the the acetic acid part.
AFAIK that kitniyot is nullified in a majority is universally agreed upon. The Rama (OC 453:1) writes that we do not forbid a mixture into which kitniyot fell, and the Mishna Berura there notes that obviously this means that there must be at least a majority of non-kitniyot and that if any piece of kitniyot is visible (nikkar) one must pick it out.
Cholov Akum is its own decree. In other words, it would have been completely kosher if not for the extra decree against it (like Pas Akum or Bishul Akum, which are intrinsically kosher yet there is a decree against consuming it). The question is Is Chalav Akum a decree "with a reason" which can be nullified if the reason doesn't exist (so that countries ...
Some thoughts to consider. One is not allowed to mix up foods on purpose in order that they should become batel (nullified). For instance, if I have two pieces of Kosher meat and one piece of not-Kosher meat, I can't mix them up so that bittul would apply and I would have three pieces of edible meat. If I do this the law of bittul doesn't apply and all ...
Per Rabbi Zusha Blech this is accurate. Per Montreal Kosher MK this is accurate. To the best of my knowledge these are reliable Hashgachos.
I posted my question as a follow-up to the one mentioned in the comments above. Rabbi Dov Lior answered it at http://www.yeshiva.org.il/ask/?id=77609 as follows (translation mine): אין ליהנות מהם, אך לימוד אינו נחשב הנאה – כי קול ומראה וריח אין בהם משום הנאה. One may not derive benefit from them, but study is not considered benefit – since [as a ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible