Curiouser and Curiouser Part I

Well known aspects of bittul b'rov seen from a different angle.

A single drop of milk from a milk carton falling into a pot of meat stew

Introduction: The halachos of rov, and especially bittul b’rov, are very ripe for illustrating our approach that halacha has “living” characteristics-akin to what I discussed in this post:

We will, G-d willing, be exploring topics of rov and bittul over the next few posts.

Part I

There is a kind of discernment in the rules of bittul that gives me the impression that it isn’t simply a two-dimensional legal principle.

The layman’s concept of bittul is that the majority overwhelms the minority and “drowns it out” to the point where it simply ceases to exist as a detectible substance. This may be the understanding of one type of bittul where the only problem is when a forbidden food can impart forbidden taste into the rest of the mixture and it requires ביטול בשישים to nullify the taste physically.¹ And even this isn’t so simple, as we will see shortly.

But there are other forms of bittul where this simplistic formula just doesn’t’ work. What about a bittul by a simple 51-49 majority when it is min b’mino (permitted item is identical in taste and appearance to the forbidden)? How can we just nullify 49% of a mixture? There is obviously a halachic/legal principle at work in which levels of abstractions are necessary.

But I want to argue in this post that at times, even standard legal principles and abstractions aren’t sufficient to explain bittul, because they are selectively applied in very curious ways.

Many unique features of bittul point in this direction:

A) Some Rishonim hold no bittul takes place when a minority of hetter is mixed into a majority of issur—even when there is sixty times issur to hetter. (Or similarly, if a minority of one type of issur is mixed together with a majority of another type of issur.) Why? Because you don’t need the mixture to be entirely composed of forbidden food (or one type of forbidden food) in order to make the mixture forbidden. Bittul of hetter isn’t necessary. If the mixture is homogenous, any amount of the forbidden component--spread throughout the mixture-- makes the entire mixture forbidden to eat. חצי שיעור אסור מן התורה. This halacha would strongly suggest that bittul is not simply a process of a majority “taking over” the minority component. If it would, then it should always happen in every case of a minority/majority mixture.

The truth is that in order for bittul to operate, it must have a halachic impact on the mixture. It would seem that the process of bittul is “cognizant” of what kind of mixture it is supposed to act upon. I think it is analogous to animals having a sense of what kind of plants or other animals are required for their nutrition, and seek out those limited sources of food while studiously avoiding others.

B) There is similar dynamic in the case of mitzvah--there is no bittul of one muttar item mixed with a majority of another muttar item of a different type—again, even when there is sixty times more of one hetter than the other type.²

You might think this is a trivial matter since everything in the mixture is already muttar, so what is the point of bittul? But there is a very important halachic significance to the lack of bittul in this case: If there is a mitzvah to eat a specific type of muttar food like matzah that is in a mixture with a minority of another type of muttar food, you can’t use the consumption of the minority food to reach a required shiur of the majority mitzvah food. So even when there would have been a halachic impact on the mixture if bittul took place, there is still no bittul of hetter b’hetter.

C) Now it gets even more interesting. Let us discuss cases where is bittul actually happening because there is more hetter than issur in the mixture. We see that even when the issur gets nullified by the halacha of bittul b’rov, and the issur component becomes permitted to eat, it will still not contribute to the shiur of the muttar food! The muttar food only converts the issur into hetter—not into the type of food doing the bittul—which is what you would imagine bittul should do logically.

Shaarei Yosher says there is common thread between these last two limitations on bittul. He says bittul only works to affect one immediate question: can this mixture before me be consumed or not? Bittul only applies when it can nullify the presence of a forbidden item and change the answer from forbidden to permitted. But once you eat it, bittul becomes irrelevant to any related halachic questions. It can’t answer the next question of: did what I just eat fulfil an obligation or make me liable for punishment?

Another explanation given by the שו”ת עונג יום טוב חלק אורח חיים סימן ד' is that bittul cannot impart any positive qualities upon the nullified food. The idea behind bittul is exactly what the word implies: nullification. The food is rendered null—insignificant by a majority opposing it. So even though the majority substance opposing it has a specific quality—like bread which triggers the chiyuv of Birkas Hamazon, or matzah—the minority food does not become more bread or matzah!³ The entire quantity of the formerly assur substance—(up to 49% of the mixture in some cases!)—is effectively halachicly emptied of any positive quality. It is halachicly blank because it has no identity of its own. It can’t be enlisted by the majority to contribute to its “identity” towards either fulfilling a mitzvah or violating a mitzvah.

You are eating halachicly undetectable food even though your stomach is getting very full from it!⁴ (We will not explore the ramifications of Bracha Rishona and Achrona of food that became battul in this post.)

Either way, these limitations on bittul seem to suggest the idea that the laws of bittul are “aware” of the kind of food it is allowed to operate on, and how to operate on it. It isn’t a one-dimensional legal principle that the majority nullifies the minority which applies consistently in all situations that are physically identical.

This next quirk about bittul is one of my favorites:

D) Many Rishonim are of the opinion that the hetter of bittul does not take effect until the mixture of issur and hetter is discovered by a human being in the state where the bittul can take effect. This means that even if there is sixty times more hetter in a pot than issur, if no one is aware that there is a mixture of issur and hetter in this pot, and they eat it, they will have violated an issur of מאכלות אסורות!

And when any Jew becomes aware of the mixture, the bittul will render the mixture muttar for everyone.

So the din of bittul is “observer-aware”! Now we are getting into quantum physics and “Schrodinger’s cat” territory.

Fascinating indeed!

1. And Rashi in Chullin daf 98 holds that we need 60 times hetter to issur even if there is no taste of issur detectable in the mixture. Sixty times is a‘shiur bittul’ with no correspondence to the metzius.

2. This principle would not include the ability to be mevatel milk separately with a pareve food or a meat separately with a pareve food. See Rema Yorah Deah 99:6

כַּזַּיִת חָלָב שֶׁנָּפַל לַמַּיִם וְנִתְבַּטֵּל בְּס', וְאַחַר כָּךְ נָפַל מִן הַמַּיִם לִקְדֵרָה שֶׁל בָּשָׂר, מֻתָּר, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין (יז) בַּבָּשָׂר ס' נֶגֶד הֶחָלָב, שֶׁהֲרֵי נִתְבַּטֵּל בַּמַּיִם (בְּאָרֹךְ) . וְכָל כַּיּוֹצֵא בְּזֶה.

Because even as a separate entities, milk and meat are already forbidden to be mixed and cooked together—even before it is eaten. So in a sense, milk and meat always have the status of issur even when separate from each other, because there is something that is assur to do with them at all times. The problem with this principle is that the Mishna in Klayim 9:1 says explicitly that a thread of wool becomes battul in a mixture of camel threads. It would seem bittul is acting on something completely muttar to remove its potential future ability to forbid a garment containing linen threads. But here is no issur to make a garment of wool and linen per se to give them a standing status of issur right now before the garment is made. The same problem is present if we say one can be mevatel chometz before Pesach—at a time when chometz is completely muttar. See נודע ביהודה מהדו"ת יו"ד ס' קפו' ובארצות החיים של המלב"ם סימן ט'

3. The “exception” to this rule is rice flour mixed with one of the five grain flours. Rice flour has the unique quality of נגרר—it will adopt the quality of the stronger grain’s taste—even when it is in the majority! So obviously this has nothing to do with bittul, so it is not really an exception at all. It is just a quirky thing about rice.)

4. This goes even as far as to eliminate its original physical qualities which would have given the mitxure additional halachic characteristics. The Oneg Yom Tov supports his position from a Rashi in Menachos 23 which says that if a small amount of flour and oil of one mincha offering got mixed into another mincha offering, the minority is bottul within the majority, however, the minority does not increase the majority’s volume! Because if it would, it will invalidate the mincha which absorbed it since an excess of flour or oil invalidates it. Rather, the flour and oil halachically disappears!