Zevachim 72b (עב:) — the Talmud in English

They shall

burn,

as is the law with regard to kil'ei hakerem, which it is a mitzva to burn, as it is stated concerning them: “A fire shall burn.”

And if

the bundles of fenugreek that are forbidden to derive benefit from

become mixed

with

other bundles of fenugreek

,

which are permitted to derive benefit from—

all of them shall burn [even if one bundle of forbidden fenugreek became mixed with many bundles of permitted fenugreek],

even if one bundle of forbidden fenugreek became mixed with many bundles of permitted fenugreek],

the words of Rabbi Meir.

And the Sages say: They shall be raised [be nullified]

the forbidden bundles that became mixed with the permitted ones, provided that the mixture is

in

a ratio of

one

forbidden item to

two hundred

permitted items. For we learned from the words of the verse that the nullification of kil'ei hakerem is achieved by a mixture of one forbidden item with two hundred permitted items.

The tanna of the Mishna continues and explains the reason for the dispute between Rabbi Meir and the Rabbis:

For Rabbi Meir would say: That

which is ordinarily counted,

because, on account of its importance, it is sold by number and not by estimation,

sanctifies [forbids] the mixture into which it became mixed [below it will be explained what “sanctifies” and forbids means], and is not nullified by a majority.

And the Sages say: It does not sanctify,

but is nullified; that is, an item that is ordinarily counted is not sufficiently important to prevent nullification through a majority,

but

only

six items

that are especially important [in that they are large, expensive, and highly valued within their species]

alone.

Whereas

Rabbi Akiva says: Seven

items.

And these are

the six important items that are not nullified by a majority according to the Sages:

Perek walnuts

[the name of a place],

and Badan pomegranates

[the name of a place],

and sealed barrels, and stalks

[ribs of]

beets, and cabbage stalks

[in Eretz Yisrael, where large cabbage stalks grow]

, and Ionian pumpkins.

Rabbi Akiva adds: Even loaves belonging to a homeowner,

but not those belonging to a baker.

The tanna of that Mishna continues and explains what the “sanctification” is that causes an important item to forbid the mixture when it becomes mixed:

If the important item was of a tree species

fit to be

forbidden by the prohibition of

orlah,

the entire mixture becomes forbidden by the prohibition of

orlah.

And if the important item was of a species sown in a field together with a vine,

fit to be

forbidden by the prohibition of

kil'ei hakerem,

the entire mixture becomes forbidden on account of

kil'ei hakerem.

And it was stated concerning this,

this Mishna, that Rabbi Yohanan and Reish Lakish disputed the explanation of Rabbi Meir’s view, who said: “Anything that is ordinarily counted” is not nullified by a majority:

Rabbi Yohanan says: We learned, ‘That which is ordinarily counted,’

in Rabbi Meir’s statement. That is, Rabbi Meir forbids the mixture only when it contains a forbidden item so important that everyone sells it by number. But if there are people who are willing to sell it by estimation, then even though some people sell it only by number, such an item is not sufficiently important to prevent the forbidden item from being nullified by a majority, according to Rabbi Meir.

Whereas

Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says: We learned, ‘Anything that is ordinarily counted,’

in Rabbi Meir’s statement. That is, even an item that some people sell by number while others sell by estimation is sufficiently important that it is not nullified by a majority.

The Gemara now concludes its objection: Why should the forbidden animals that became mixed with valid offerings not be nullified?

This works out well according to Reish Lakish,

who said that “anything that is ordinarily counted” is not nullified by a majority according to Rabbi Meir. Accordingly, the animals in our Mishna are not nullified by a majority, because there are people who sell them specifically by number.

But according to Rabbi Yohanan,

who holds that only an item defined as “that which is ordinarily counted” is not nullified by a majority, whereas an item that some people sell by estimation and do not insist on counting is not sufficiently important and is indeed nullified by a majority,

what can be said?

Why is the forbidden animal not nullified by the majority of valid animals? After all, there are people who do not insist on selling their animals by number, but are willing to sell them by estimation, as a herd; and in such a case Rabbi Yohanan holds that they are nullified by a majority!?

And we answer:

Rav Pappa said: This tanna

of our Mishna, who holds that a forbidden animal is not nullified by a majority of valid animals,

is the tanna of ‘the litra of dried figs,’

as he proceeds to explain.