Nedarim 58

Sugya Map

The sugya on Nedarim 58a grapples with a foundational principle in kashrut and issur v'heter: the distinction between a forbidden item whose prohibition can be removed (davar sheyesh lo matirin) and one whose prohibition cannot be removed (davar she'ein lo matirin). This distinction dictates whether an item nullifies (mitbatel) in a mixture.

• Issue: What constitutes davar sheyesh lo matirin? Does new growth (tzemicha) from a forbidden item neutralize its original prohibition? How does Shevi'it produce, with its unique temporal prohibition, fit into this framework?
• Nafka Mina(s):
  • Halachic Nullification: Determines the shiur (measure) for nullification in a mixture. Davar sheyesh lo matirin generally does not nullify at all (b'kol shehu), whereas davar she'ein lo matirin nullifies in a majority (b'rov) or a specific ratio (e.g., 1:100 for terumah, 1:200 for orlah).
  • Status of Shevi'it Produce: Clarifies the halachic treatment of Shevi'it produce that regrows in the eighth year, and whether its original sanctity persists.
  • The Nature of Issur: Explores whether issur is solely tied to the physical cheftza (object) or if its connection to the ground and subsequent growth can alter its status.
• Primary Sources:
  • Mishna Nedarim 58a: The opening statement establishing the core distinction between davar sheyesh lo matirin and davar she'ein lo matirin.
  • Mishna Shevi'it 7:7: Pertains to Shevi'it produce prohibiting b'kol shehu for biur.
  • Mishna Shevi'it 6:3: Discusses sixth-year onions sprouting in Shevi'it, and Shevi'it onions sprouting in the eighth year, introducing the concept of tzemicha.
  • Baraita Nedarim 58a: The case of ḥasayot (arum, garlic, onions) and a Jew suspect about Shevi'it, further probing tzemicha.
  • Gemara Nedarim 58a: The extensive discussion, challenges, and resolutions, including Rabbi Yitzchak's novel distinction regarding Shevi'it and the counter-proof from ma'aser.

Text Snapshot

The sugya opens with a foundational Mishnaic principle, articulated in our Gemara, distinguishing between two categories of forbidden items concerning their nullification in mixtures:

כל דבר שיש לו מתירין, כגון טבל ומעשר שני והקדש וחדש — לא נתנו בו חכמים שיעור. וכל דבר שאין לו מתירין, כגון תרומה ותרומת מעשר וחלה, ערלה וכלאי הכרם — נתנו בו חכמים שיעור. Nedarim 58a

Any item that can become permitted, such as untithed produce [tevel], and second tithe [ma'aser sheni], and consecrated items [hekdesh], and new [chadash] produce — the Sages did not determine a measure for its [nullification]. And any item that cannot become permitted, such as terumah, and terumat ma'aser, and ḥalla, orlah, and kilayim of the vineyard — the Sages determined a measure for its [nullification].

Dikduk/Leshon Nuance:

• "יש לו מתירין" / "אין לו מתירין": The core phrase. Matirin (מתירין) refers to a process or state that renders the item permissible. The Gemara's ensuing discussion will explore the breadth and depth of this definition, especially whether a temporal lapse of a prohibition or subsequent growth counts as a "matir."
• "לא נתנו בו חכמים שיעור": Implies that such items prohibit b'kol shehu (even a minuscule amount) and do not nullify in any quantity of permitted produce of their own species. This is often contrasted with bittul b'rov or bittul b'shishim for other issurim.
• "נתנו בו חכמים שיעור": Means there is a specific ratio (e.g., 1:100, 1:200) in which the forbidden item nullifies in a mixture.
• The examples provided are critical:
  • Tevel is permitted by tithing.
  • Ma'aser Sheni and Hekdesh are permitted by redemption.
  • Chadash is permitted by the Omer offering.
  • Terumah, Terumat Ma'aser, Challa are issurei kodesh that remain forbidden to non-Kohanim.
  • Orlah (fruit of the first three years) and Kilayim HaKerem (forbidden intercrops) are never permitted for consumption.

The Gemara then immediately challenges this framework with Shevi'it produce:

מתיב רב ששת: והלא שביעית, דבר שאין לו מתירין הוא, ולא נתנו בו חכמים שיעור, דתנן: השביעית אוסרת בכל שהוא במינה! Nedarim 58a

Rava challenges: But isn’t Sabbatical-Year produce an item that cannot become permitted, and nevertheless, the Sages did not determine a measure for its neutralization, as we learned in a mishna: The Sabbatical-Year produce prohibits permitted produce of its own species in any amount!

This kushya sets the stage for the entire sugya, as Shevi'it appears to be davar she'ein lo matirin yet prohibits b'kol shehu, contradicting the Mishna's rule. This tension drives the search for a nuanced understanding of "matirin" and the mechanisms of bittul.

Readings

The Rishonim and Acharonim delve deeply into the Mishna's opening statement, clarifying the definitions and implications of davar sheyesh lo matirin and davar she'ein lo matirin. Their analyses reveal the subtle distinctions that underpin these fundamental halachic categories.

Ran (Rabbeinu Nissim) on Nedarim 58a

The Ran offers a meticulous analysis of the Mishna's categories, particularly focusing on the precise definition of "matirin" and the reasons for the distinctions.

Ran on Nedarim 58a:1:1: Defining "Davar Sheyesh Lo Matirin"

כל דבר שיש לו מתירין כגון טבל - שנתערב בחולין ויש לו מתירין שיכול להפריש ממקום אחר ומעשר שני והקדש יש להם היתר בפדייה: Ran on Nedarim 58a:1:1

Any item that can become permitted, such as untithed produce [tevel] — that was mixed with chullin (non-sacred produce) and has a matir in that one can separate terumah and ma'aser for it from a different place. And ma'aser sheni and hekdesh have permission through redemption.

Ran's Chiddush: The Ran clarifies that tevel, even when mixed, retains its issur and doesn't nullify because one can separate tithes for it, even if not directly from the mixture itself. This introduces the concept that the matir doesn't necessarily have to be applied to the cheftza itself, but rather can be accomplished "from a different place" (mimakom acher) or through an external action that rectifies its status. This emphasizes the potential for rectification as the defining characteristic.

Ran on Nedarim 58a:1:2: Chadash

וחדש - שהעומר מתירו: Ran on Nedarim 58a:1:2

And chadash (new crop) — which the Omer offering permits.

Ran's Chiddush: This is a straightforward application. The Omer offering acts as a clear, defined matir for chadash, permitting the entire new crop season. Its permission is not inherent to the produce but external and time-bound.

Ran on Nedarim 58a:1:3: The Reason for Davar Sheyesh Lo Matirin

לא נתנו בהם חכמים שיעור - שאוסרים בכל שהוא במינן מיהו שלא במינן בנותן טעם כיון דהשתא אסירי כמו שכתבתי למעלה. ובפרק בתרא דמס' ע"ז יהיב טעמא אחרינא לטבל דלא בטיל משום דכהתירו כך איסורו: Ran on Nedarim 58a:1:3

The Sages did not determine a measure for them — for they prohibit any amount (b'kol shehu) within their own species. However, when not of their own species, they prohibit if they impart flavor (b'noten ta'am), since they are currently forbidden, as I wrote above. And in the last chapter of Tractate Avodah Zarah, it gives another reason for tevel not nullifying: because its prohibition is like its permission.

Ran's Chiddush: The Ran provides two critical insights here.

1. Scope of B'kol Shehu: He clarifies that the b'kol shehu stringency for davar sheyesh lo matirin applies specifically to mixtures of the same species (b'minan). For mixtures of different species (shelo b'minan), the standard noten ta'am (imparting flavor) rule applies. This is a crucial practical distinction, as many issurim are often mixed with different species.
2. Alternative Reason for Tevel: He refers to an alternative explanation from Avodah Zarah 63a, stating that tevel doesn't nullify because its prohibition is like its permission. This profound statement suggests that the very mechanism by which tevel becomes permissible (tithing) is intrinsically linked to its prohibition. Since tithing defines its permitted status, it cannot simply disappear through bittul. This introduces a conceptual link between the nature of the issur and the nature of its matir.

Ran on Nedarim 58a:1:4: Terumah and She'ila

וכל דבר שאין לו מתירין כגון תרומה ותרומת מעשר וחלה - דאע"ג דמצי לאתשולי עלייהו כיון דליכא מצוה למיעבד הכי לא מיקרו דבר שיש לו מתירים כדאמרינן לקמן: Ran on Nedarim 58a:1:4

And any item that cannot become permitted, such as terumah, and terumat ma'aser, and ḥalla — even though one can ask a Kohen to permit them [through she'ila], since there is no mitzva to do so, they are not called davar sheyesh lo matirin, as we say later.

Ran's Chiddush: This is arguably one of the Ran's most significant chiddushim here. He addresses the potential counter-argument that terumah does have a matir: a non-Kohen could ask a Kohen to she'ila (nullify the terumah status by declaring it chullin after consumption, a theoretical and highly problematic matir). The Ran rejects this, stating that since there is no mitzva to perform such an act (it's not a standard, encouraged method of permission), it does not qualify the item as davar sheyesh lo matirin. This sets a high bar for what counts as a "matir" – it must be a legitimate, intended means of permission, not just a theoretical possibility. This implies that the halachic system wants the matir to be performed, and the issur is maintained to encourage it.

Ran on Nedarim 58a:1:5: Nullification Ratios

נתנו בהם חכמים שיעור - שאפי' נתערבו במינן בטלין תרומה ותרומת מעשר וחלה במאה ערלה וכלאי הכרם במאתים ובשאינן מינן כולן בששים: Ran on Nedarim 58a:1:5

The Sages determined a measure for them — that even if they are mixed with their own species, terumah, terumat ma'aser, and ḥalla nullify in one hundred [parts], orlah and kilayim of the vineyard in two hundred [parts], and when not of their own species, all of them in sixty [parts].

Ran's Chiddush: This provides the practical shiurim for the items classified as davar she'ein lo matirin. He differentiates between min b'mino (same species) and min b'she'eino mino (different species), establishing specific ratios for each. This codifies the Mishna's general statement into concrete numbers.

Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki) on Nedarim 58a

Rashi, ever the master of concise clarity, provides the straightforward contextual understanding of the Mishna.

Rashi on Nedarim 58a:1:1: Examples and Reasoning

כגון טבל - שיש לו מתירין שמתקנו וניתר ומעשר והקדש יש לו מתירין על ידי פדייה וחדש עומר מתירו להכי אפילו באלף לא בטלי דהא אפשר להו בתקנתא: Rashi on Nedarim 58a:1:1

Such as tevel — which has a matir in that one rectifies it and it becomes permitted. And ma'aser sheni and hekdesh have a matir through redemption. And chadash the Omer offering permits. Therefore, even in a thousand [parts], they do not nullify, because it is possible to rectify them.

Rashi's Chiddush: Rashi's chiddush lies in his direct explanation of the reason for the stringency: "דהא אפשר להו בתקנתא" (because it is possible to rectify them). This highlights that the potential for permission, rather than its actualization, is the key. The issur remains potent to ensure that the tikkun (rectification) is performed. This serves as the underlying rationale for the entire category of davar sheyesh lo matirin.

Rashi on Nedarim 58a:1:2: Nullification for Davar She'ein Lo Matirin

נתנו בהם חכמים שיעור - דתרומה בטלה במאה וערלה במאתים: Rashi on Nedarim 58a:1:2

The Sages determined a measure for them — that terumah nullifies in one hundred [parts] and orlah in two hundred [parts].

Rashi's Chiddush: Rashi provides specific examples of the shiurim for davar she'ein lo matirin, namely 1:100 for terumah and 1:200 for orlah. This grounds the Mishna's general statement in concrete halachic practice.

Tosafot on Nedarim 58a

Tosafot, known for their dialectical approach, often present alternative interpretations or expand on the possibilities within the Gemara.

Tosafot on Nedarim 58a:1:1: Tevel and Alternative Matirin

כל דבר שיש לו מתירין כגון טבל - שנתערב בחולין דמצי מעשר עליו מדמאי או מעציץ שאינו נקוב: Tosafot on Nedarim 58a:1:1

Any item that can become permitted, such as tevel — that was mixed with chullin, for one can tithe for it from d'mai (doubtfully tithed produce) or from a non-perforated pot.

Tosafot's Chiddush: Tosafot offers practical examples of how tevel can be rectified even when mixed. Beyond the general "from a different place" mentioned by Ran, Tosafot specifies d'mai (produce whose tithing status is uncertain but can be tithed upon by Rabbinic decree) or produce grown in a non-perforated pot (atzitz she'eino nakuv). The latter is significant because produce from such a pot is generally exempt from certain tithes, yet can be used for tithing other produce. This expands the scope of what constitutes a "matir" by suggesting creative halachic mechanisms for rectification, even in complex scenarios. It underscores the Rabbinic ingenuity in ensuring that a matir is always possible, thereby maintaining the stringent status of davar sheyesh lo matirin.

Synthesis of Rishonim

The Rishonim collectively illuminate the principle of davar sheyesh lo matirin. Rashi sets the basic rationale: the possibility of rectification. Ran refines this by distinguishing min b'mino from shelo b'minan and, crucially, by limiting "matir" to halachically encouraged avenues, thereby excluding theoretical possibilities like she'ila for terumah. Tosafot provides further practical illustrations of how matirin can be applied, even in seemingly difficult cases. The common thread is that the issur remains potent as a constant reminder and imperative to perform the necessary tikkun, underscoring the dynamic nature of these prohibitions.

Friction

The core tension in our sugya revolves around the category of Shevi'it produce and its perplexing halachic status regarding nullification and the impact of subsequent growth. The Gemara grapples with kushyot and terutzim to align Shevi'it with the Mishna's framework of davar sheyesh lo matirin vs. davar she'ein lo matirin.

The Initial Kushya: Shevi'it as Davar She'ein Lo Matirin Yet Oser B'kol Shehu

The Gemara immediately challenges the Mishna's rule:

מתיב רב ששת: והלא שביעית, דבר שאין לו מתירין הוא, ולא נתנו בו חכמים שיעור, דתנן: השביעית אוסרת בכל שהוא במינה! Nedarim 58a

Rava challenges: Shevi'it produce, after the time of biur (removal), is davar she'ein lo matirin – its prohibition is permanent, and it cannot be "permitted." Yet, the Mishna in Shevi'it 7:7 states that it "prohibits in any amount of its own species" (oseret b'kol shehu b'minah). This contradicts our Mishna, which states that davar she'ein lo matirin does have a shiur for nullification (i.e., it can nullify). Why does Shevi'it behave like davar sheyesh lo matirin in terms of bittul, despite being davar she'ein lo matirin?

Rabbi Shimon's Initial Terutz

Rabbi Shimon distinguishes between two aspects of Shevi'it produce:

אמר להם ר"ש: אף אני לא אמרתי אלא לענין ביעור. אבל לענין אכילה — בנותן טעם. והואיל ויש לו היתר עד זמן הביעור, הרי הוא כדבר שיש לו מתירין. Nedarim 58a

Rabbi Shimon responds that the Mishna in Shevi'it 7:7, which states b'kol shehu, refers only to the mitzva of biur (removal from possession). For consumption (achila) after biur, it prohibits only b'noten ta'am (if it imparts flavor), implying it does nullify. He then adds a crucial point: "And since it is permitted until the time of biur, it is like davar sheyesh lo matirin." Analysis: Rabbi Shimon's terutz introduces a temporal dimension to "matirin." The fact that Shevi'it produce is permitted for a period (until biur) makes it akin to davar sheyesh lo matirin. This broadens the definition of "matirin" beyond a specific halachic action (like tithing or redemption) to include a time-bound permissibility. However, the Gemara rejects this, noting "perhaps here too, it is different when the ruling is a stringency." (וכי תימא שאני הכא דחומרא הוא). This means Shevi'it might be b'kol shehu for biur due to a specific stringency, not because it fits the davar sheyesh lo matirin category.

The Kushya of Permitted Growth (Gidulei Heter)

The Gemara then shifts to the question of tzemicha (growth) and whether permitted growth from a forbidden item neutralizes the original prohibition. This is explored through several cases:

Case 1: Shevi'it Onions (Mishna Shevi'it 6:3)

אלא, מאישמעאל מכפר ימא, דתנן: בצלים של ששית שירדו עליהם גשמים בשביעית וצמחו, אם עליהן שחורים — אסורים, הורקו — מותרין. Nedarim 58a

This Mishna discusses sixth-year onions that sprout in Shevi'it. If their leaves are dark (shechorin), indicating original growth, they are forbidden as Shevi'it. If they turned green (horiku), indicating new growth, they are permitted. The parallel case is Shevi'it onions sprouting after the Shevi'it year (in the eighth year) – they are permitted. Question: "Is this to say that permitted growth neutralizes the prohibition?" (לימא מותרין, מבטל איסורו בגידולין?) Rejection: "Perhaps it is referring to crushed [onions]" (ואולי הכא במדוקנין). If the original onion was crushed, its substance is negligible, and the new growth is effectively starting anew. This doesn't prove bittul b'gidulim.

Case 2: Chasayot with a Samaritan (Baraita)

אלא, מהא דתניא: המנכש חסות עם כותי, אוכל מהן עראי ומעשרן ודאי. ר"ש בן אלעזר אומר: אם של ישראל חשוד על השביעית, במוצאי שביעית — מותר. Nedarim 58a

A baraita states that one who weeds ḥasayot (arum, garlic, onions) with a Samaritan eats casually and then tithes. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar states: If it belongs to an Israelite "suspect about Shevi'it," it is permitted "at the conclusion of the Shevi'it year" (b'motza'ei Shevi'it). Question: "Is this to say that the permitted growths of the eighth year neutralize the prohibition?" (לימא מבטל גידולין איסורו?) Rejections (series of terutzim and kushyot):

1. "Perhaps it is referring to an item whose seeds cease" (ואולי במקום שזרען כלה). If the original seed totally disintegrates, the new growth is entirely permitted.
   • Counter: "Isn't it taught: These are ḥasayot, for example, arum, garlic, and onions, whose seeds do not cease?" (והא תניא: אלו הן חסות, כגון לוף ושום ובצלים, שאין זרען כלה). So this terutz is invalid.
2. "Perhaps it is referring to plants that were crushed" (ואולי במדוקנין).
   • Counter: "It is the case of one who is suspect about Shevi'it, that is taught in the baraita, and one who is suspect would not bother to eliminate the prohibition by crushing it." (חשוד על השביעית קתני, וחשוד לא טרח ומדקי).
3. "Perhaps it is referring to a mixture" (ואולי בתערובת). The forbidden ḥasayot were mixed with permitted ones and nullified.
   • Counter: "One who weeds, is taught in the baraita, indicating that he is eating the leaves as he weeds them, leaving no opportunity for the ḥasayot to be mixed with others." (המנכש קתני). This implies direct consumption of the specific plants being weeded.

The Gemara concludes that these kushyot are strong enough to refute opinions that orlah and kilayim growth does not neutralize the prohibition:

לימא, תהוי תיובתא דר' יוחנן ורבי יונתן? Nedarim 58a Let us say that this is a conclusive refutation of the opinions of Rabbi Yoḥanan and Rabbi Yonatan? (Who hold that orlah and kilayim growth does not neutralize).

Rabbi Yitzchak's Terutz and its Challenge

Rabbi Yitzchak offers a fundamental distinction for Shevi'it:

אמר ר' יצחק: שאני שביעית, הואיל ואסורה על ידי קרקע, ביטולה על ידי קרקע נמי. Nedarim 58a

Rabbi Yitzchak said: Sabbatical-Year produce is different. Since its prohibition is engendered by means of the ground, its nullification is effected by means of the ground as well. Analysis: This is a profound terutz. Rabbi Yitzchak argues that Shevi'it is unique. Its issur stems from the land itself (the land rests, its produce is sacred). Therefore, its bittul (nullification) can also be achieved through the ground – by replanting it in a permitted context (e.g., after Shevi'it). This ties the mechanism of issur to the mechanism of heter.

The Strongest Kushya: Ma'aser vs. Shevi'it

The Gemara immediately challenges Rabbi Yitzchak's principle:

אלא מעשר, דאסור על ידי קרקע, ביטולו על ידי קרקע נמי? והתניא: ליטרא טבל זרעה בארץ, וצמחה והיא עשרה ליטרין — חייבת במעשר ובשביעית. ואותה ליטרא — מעשר עליה ממקום אחר, בחשבון! Nedarim 58a

Isn’t there the case of tithe (ma'aser), whose prohibition is engendered by means of the ground, but its nullification is not effected by means of the ground? As it is taught in a baraita: With regard to a litra of untithed first tithe, which one sowed in the ground, and it grew and it is now approximately ten litra, that additional growth is obligated to have tithe taken and is subject to the halakhot of Sabbatical-Year produce. And with regard to that original litra of untithed first tithe that he sowed, one tithes for it from produce in a different place, based on a calculation!

Analysis: This is the strongest kushya on Rabbi Yitzchak. Ma'aser (specifically terumat ma'aser, as it's from first tithe) is also an issur that arises "by means of the ground" (its obligation is triggered by growth from the ground). If Rabbi Yitzchak's principle were universal, then growth from tevel should also neutralize its prohibition. However, the baraita clearly states that the original litra of tevel sown still requires tithing "from a different place" (mimakom acher), meaning its issur was not neutralized by the permitted new growth. The new growth is itself obligated in tithes, but it doesn't "cleanse" the original tevel. This directly contradicts Rabbi Yitzchak's proposed terutz for Shevi'it.

Possible Terutzim (Implicit in Gemara/Acharonim)

The Gemara leaves this kushya on Rabbi Yitzchak unanswered, which is unusual for a sugya that typically seeks a resolution. This kushya on ma'aser is therefore the central "friction" point. Acharonim propose several ways to resolve it:

1. Differentiating "Issur al yedei Karka": Perhaps the nature of "prohibition by means of the ground" is different for Shevi'it than for ma'aser. For Shevi'it, the kedusha (sanctity) is on the ground itself, which then imbues its produce. For ma'aser, the ground merely serves as the trigger for the obligation to separate, but the issur of tevel is on the produce after it has grown, due to the lack of separation. The growth of Shevi'it produce in a non-Shevi'it year changes the ground's status, thereby removing the source of the issur. For ma'aser, the original issur remains because the chiyuv (obligation) of tithing was never fulfilled for that specific cheftza.
2. "Davar Sheyesh Lo Matirin" for Ma'aser: Ma'aser (or tevel) is davar sheyesh lo matirin. As the Ran noted, its issur is linked to its matir (tithing). Since there is a clear, active matir for tevel, it cannot be nullified by growth, regardless of its connection to the ground. Shevi'it, however, after biur, is davar she'ein lo matirin (according to the original understanding), and thus requires a unique terutz like R' Yitzchak's.
3. Nature of Kedusha: The kedusha of Shevi'it is inherent to the produce by virtue of its growth in the Shevi'it year. When it regrows in the eighth year, the kedusha of the eighth year (or lack thereof) overtakes the previous kedusha. Terumah and ma'aser are kodesh in a different sense; they are a portion set aside for kohanim or Levi'im. Their issur is not so much about the ground as it is about misappropriation of kodesh.

Ultimately, the Gemara's unresolved kushya against Rabbi Yitzchak highlights the complexity and non-uniformity of halachic principles. While "issur by ground, nullification by ground" offers an elegant solution for Shevi'it, the case of ma'aser forces us to acknowledge that such principles are not universally applicable and that other factors (like the presence of an active matir) can override them.

Intertext

The principles discussed in Nedarim 58a resonate throughout Halacha, particularly in Kodashim and Zera'im, and find expression in later codes and responsa.

Shulchan Aruch and the Principle of Davar Sheyesh Lo Matirin

The fundamental distinction between davar sheyesh lo matirin and davar she'ein lo matirin is codified as a cornerstone of bittul b'ta'arovet (nullification in mixtures).

כל איסורים שבתורה שנתערבו בהיתר, אם יש להם מתירין, אפילו באלף לא בטלו. ואם אין להם מתירין, בטלים ברוב, או בששים, או במאה, או במאתים, כפי הדין המפורש בכל אחד ואחד. Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 102:1

All prohibitions in the Torah that are mixed with permitted items: if they have matirin (means of becoming permitted), even in one thousand [parts], they are not nullified. And if they do not have matirin, they are nullified by a majority, or by sixty, or by one hundred, or by two hundred, according to the law specified for each individual one.

Cross-reference: This mirrors the Mishna in Nedarim 58a precisely. The Shulchan Aruch clearly states that davar sheyesh lo matirin never nullifies, reflecting the stringency discussed. The specific ratios for davar she'ein lo matirin are also mentioned generally.

• Rama's Nuance (Yoreh De'ah 102:1): The Rama adds a critical chiddush that if the matir is not readily available or involves a significant loss, some authorities permit bittul even for davar sheyesh lo matirin. For example, if one would incur a prohibitive expense to perform the matir. This introduces a pragmatic dimension to the strict theoretical framework, though it's a minority opinion and not universally accepted. This is particularly relevant for things like hekdesh where redemption might be costly.

Tzemicha (Growth) in Other Contexts

The Gemara's discussion of tzemicha neutralizing issur in Shevi'it finds parallels and contrasts elsewhere.

Orlah and Kilayim

The Gemara in Nedarim 58a explicitly mentions Rabbi Yoḥanan and Rabbi Yonatan, who hold that orlah and kilayim growth does not neutralize the prohibition. This is the prevailing halacha.

ר"י ור"י אומרים: אין גידולי ערלה וכלאים מבטלין את איסורן. (Derived from the Gemara's discussion aiming to refute them)

If orlah fruit is planted, any new fruit grown from it is still orlah. Similarly, kilayim (forbidden mixtures) retain their issur. This highlights the unique nature of Shevi'it in Rabbi Yitzchak's terutz, where the issur is tied to the ground itself. For orlah and kilayim, the issur is inherent to the plant or the mixture, regardless of the ground's status (after the initial planting). This reinforces the idea that tzemicha generally does not nullify issur, with Shevi'it being a specific exception due to its unique kedusha.

Ma'aser and Terumah

The Gemara's unresolved kushya from ma'aser (tevel) is a powerful intertextual link. The baraita explicitly states that an original litra of tevel sown and regrown still requires separate tithing. This means tzemicha does not nullify tevel.

ליטרא טבל זרעה בארץ... ואותה ליטרא — מעשר עליה ממקום אחר, בחשבון! Nedarim 58a

This case directly contrasts tevel with Shevi'it. While both prohibitions are "by means of the ground" in some sense, tevel has a clear, active matir (tithing), which overrides the principle of bittul b'gidulim. This demonstrates that the davar sheyesh lo matirin principle is exceptionally strong and can prevent bittul even when other factors might suggest it.

Responsa Literature

Responsa literature often grapples with complex mixtures and the application of these rules, especially in modern contexts with advanced food processing. For instance, the question of whether a minute amount of chametz (leavened bread) from before Passover, which is davar sheyesh lo matirin (since it can be sold to a non-Jew), can be nullified in a large mixture, is a frequent topic. The halacha is that it does not nullify, even in "a thousand," because of its matir.

Example: The Chassam Sofer (Yoreh De'ah 101) discusses davar sheyesh lo matirin in the context of chametz. He reinforces that the issur is so strong that the item cannot be nullified, even if the matir (selling to a non-Jew) is a rabbinic enactment. This shows the principle's resilience across different types of issurim and its foundational role in kashrut.

The intricate dance between the nature of the issur, the presence of a matir, and the physical transformation through growth reveals a sophisticated halachic system that is both rigorous and nuanced.

Psak/Practice

The principles derived from Nedarim 58a form critical pillars of Kashrut and Halacha l'Ma'aseh. The distinction between davar sheyesh lo matirin and davar she'ein lo matirin profoundly impacts practical decisions regarding mixtures and the treatment of forbidden items.

The Immutable Rule: Davar Sheyesh Lo Matirin

The primary psak is unequivocally stated in the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De'ah 102:1): any item that can become permitted, even in an infinite mixture, does not nullify. This means that if even a minuscule amount of tevel, ma'aser sheni, hekdesh, or chadash is mixed into permitted food, the entire mixture remains forbidden until the original forbidden item is rectified (e.g., by tithing the tevel). This applies to items of the same species (min b'mino). If it's a different species (min b'she'eino mino), it still requires bittul b'shishim (nullification in 1:60), as the Ran clarified, because the issur is still present and requires a more significant dilution than for davar she'ein lo matirin.

This stringent rule serves as a meta-psak heuristic, emphasizing personal responsibility for rectification. It prevents people from passively relying on bittul to circumvent religious obligations or to benefit from sacred items. The issur remains potent as an active imperative for tikkun.

Nullification Ratios for Davar She'ein Lo Matirin

For items that cannot become permitted, specific shiurim (ratios) apply for nullification:

• Terumah, Terumat Ma'aser, Challa: Nullify in 1:100 of permitted produce of the same species (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 305:1).
• Orlah, Kilayim HaKerem: Nullify in 1:200 of permitted produce of the same species (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 294:1, 306:1).
• All Issurim (different species): Generally nullify in 1:60 (bittul b'shishim) if they don't impart flavor, regardless of whether they are davar sheyesh lo matirin or davar she'ein lo matirin (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 102:1). The Ran (Nedarim 58a:1:3) notes this for davar sheyesh lo matirin as well, meaning the b'kol shehu rule is limited to min b'mino.

Shevi'it and Bittul b'Gidulim

The Gemara's complex discussion regarding Shevi'it and bittul b'gidulim (nullification by growth) results in a nuanced psak. While the Gemara leaves the kushya on Rabbi Yitzchak's terutz unresolved, the general understanding in Halacha is that Shevi'it produce can be nullified by growth if replanted in a non-Shevi'it year, consistent with Rabbi Yitzchak's principle that its issur and heter are both "by means of the ground." This is a specific exception to the general rule that growth does not nullify issur (as seen with orlah and tevel).

However, this heter is not without its caveats. Many poskim are stringent and require that the original forbidden part be completely absorbed or lose its significance, or that the growth be entirely new and distinct. The Minchat Chinuch (Mitzvah 84) explores these details extensively.

Meta-Psak Heuristics

The sugya offers profound meta-psak heuristics:

1. Intentionality of Matir: A "matir" must be a legitimate, halachically intended means of permission, not merely a theoretical possibility (Ran on Nedarim 58a:1:4, regarding terumah and she'ila).
2. Encouraging Tikkun: The stringency of davar sheyesh lo matirin is a Rabbinic safeguard to ensure that people perform the necessary tikkun (rectification) rather than relying on dilution.
3. Nature of Issur: The origin and nature of the issur (e.g., "by means of the ground") can dictate the mechanism of its nullification, leading to specific exceptions like Shevi'it.
4. Distinction Min B'Mino / She'eino Mino: The distinction between mixtures of the same species and different species is fundamental, with different nullification rules applying.

These principles guide poskim in assessing novel mixtures and applying the complex rules of bittul.

Takeaway

The sugya profoundly illustrates how Halacha categorizes prohibitions based on their potential for rectification, forging a rigorous system that compels active observance. The dynamic interplay between the item's inherent status, its connection to the ground, and the possibility of new growth reveals a sophisticated halachic jurisprudence, where issur is not merely a static state but a call to tikkun.