Yerushalmi Terumot 10:5 ירושלמי תרומות י׳:ה׳

MISHNAH: If an impure fish⁶⁵Any aquatic animal without scales and fins. While the non-kosher fish cannot be eaten and cannot be knowingly preserved with kosher fish, fishsauce, whose biblical status is unclear, may be used if the admixture was not intentional and the forbidden amount is minute. was preserved with a pure fish, if in any keg⁶⁶In Syriac, גרב is a vessel containing exactly 1 seah. containing two seah the impure fish weighed ten zuz in Judea which are five tetradrachmas⁶⁷In Sifra Šemini Parašah 3(9), “Ten zuz in Judea which equal ten tetradrachmas in Galilee.” in Galilee, the sauce is forbidden⁶⁸The contents of the keg are forbidden food. “Sauce” here is not the fluid in which the fish is preserved but the fluid oozing out of the fish.. Rebbi Jehudah says, a quarter [log] in two seah⁶⁹Since a seah equals 24 log, this is 1/196 whereas the first Tanna allows only 1/960 of contamination (Note 81).. Rebbi Yose said, one sixteenth of it⁷⁰If the forbidden fluid is at least 1/16 of the kosher fish fluid, the mixture is forbidden. In this interpretation, R. Yose does not express a separate opinion on the impure fish itself.
According to R. Abraham ben David (whose interpretation is accepted by R. S. Lieberman), R. Yose refers to the garab as “it”. Since the garab contains 9600 zuz (Notes 78–81), 1/16 of it would be 600 zuz and the 10 zuz given in the Mishnah are 1/60 of this quantity. Therefore, R. Yose asserts that in this case also the mixture is permitted if the kosher food is as least 60 times the quantity of the forbidden..
Impure locusts preserved with pure locusts do not forbid the fluid exuding⁷¹This fluid, which can exist only in minute quantities, is disregarded. The list of kosher locusts is in Lev. 11:22. from the latter. ⁷²This text is also in Idiut 7:2 Rebbi Ẓadoq⁷³A student of the House of Shammai who survived the fall of Jerusalem and became a follower of the rules of the House of Hillel. When Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai defected to the Romans, one of the favors he asked from Vespasian was medical attention for R. Ẓadoq. The meaning of R. Ẓadoq’s testimony is explained in the last paragraph of the Halakhah. testified that the fluid exuding from impure locusts⁷⁴Any locust not on the list of Lev. 11:22. The only Jewish group with a continued tradition of identification of the edible locust is Yemenite Jewry. In Yemen, locusts were only eaten roasted. is pure.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi stated from Bar Delaiah⁷⁵A similar text is in Tosephta 9:2: “Unsalted pure fish preserved with salted impure fish is forbidden”. But did we not state: “He washes it and it is permitted”⁷⁶In the Tosephta (9:2), this is stated for the case when the fish are either both unsalted or both salted. In Sifra Šemini Parashah 3(6) it is stated: (Lev. 11:9) “Those you shall eat,” to include pure fish preserved with impure.
The Babli (Avodah Zarah 40a) reports on a disagreement on whether the fluid oozing out from non-kosher seafood is forbidden. It decides that it is forbidden; a decision accepted by R. Zeïra.? Rebbi Mana said, he who said it is permitted, when he preserved them simultaneously; he who said it is prohibited when he preserved them one after the other. You can understand that this is so, since we have stated “in heave fluid⁵⁹Water in which heave olives were preserved; cf. Halakhah 7. it is forbidden;” [is that] not when he preserved one after the other⁷⁷This really proves only R. Mana’s second statement.?

“Any keg containing two seah”. How much is in a seah? [24] (14) log⁷⁸Both mss. have “14”, but this number is not a divisor of 960. R. Solomon ibn Adrat, Responsa vol. 1, No. 281, reads “24”. A seah is 6 qab, each qab is 4 log.. How much is in a log? 2 pounds⁷⁹Of the 25 mss. collated in The Mishanh with variant readings(Jerusalem 1975), 11 read zin, 1 ziz (reading also of the Rome ms. in the Halakhah), and 12 zuz in the Mishnah text. Therefore, zin here equals zuz in the Mishnah.. How much is in a pound? 100 zin⁸⁰Since log refers to volume and pound to weight, one has to assume that the volume of 1 log of water weighs 2 Jerusalem pounds. Under the Julian-Claudian dynasty, a denar (zuz) was 1/96 of a Roman 1b. of 12 Troy oz., (about 345 g). It follows from the text that this denar was 1/100 of a smaller pound.. It turns out that each single zin corresponds to one in 960⁸¹Since 1 zin = 1/9600 of 2 seah, and 10 zin of impure fish make the 2 seah forbidden, it follows that each single zin of impure fish contaminates 960 times its weight or volume. (Explanation of R. Solomon ibn Adrat.). Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun instructed at Akhbara⁸²The place of R. Yose bar Abun’s academy. For practical purposes, he replaced 960 by 1000.: one in a thousand.

Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina: A quarter [log]⁸³Usually, רובע means “a quarter qab” which is a dry measure equal to one log in liquid measure. But since the Yerushalmi here follows R. Jehudah in the Mishnah, one has to understand “quarter log”. of fish sauce in two seah of fish sauce⁸⁴Fish sauce is permitted if the proportion of impure fish (in an inadvertent contamination) is less than 1 in 196 (replaced for practical purposes by 1 in 200 by R. Abbahu.). But the sauce of an impure fish never can save⁸⁵Fish sauce is forbidden only as “sweat exuding from the fish” (Babli Ḥulin 99b). It never can contribute to the 196 times the permitted food has to exceed the forbidden.! Rebbi Abbahu said, I computed that close to 200⁸⁶R. S. Lieberman (Tosefta kifshutah 2, p. 440) accepts an explanation that R. Abbahu determined that the sauce exuded by 10 zin impure fish will be about 1/200 of a garab of fish and sauce. In the Babli (Ḥulin 99b), R. Yose bar Ḥanina implies that the anonymous Tanna also accepts R. Jehudah’s opinion about fish sauce and requires 1/960 only for the fish itself. This also is the position of the Yerushalmi which distinguishes between the impure fish, discussed in the preceding paragraph, and fish sauce.. Rebbi Ila in the name of Rebbi Simeon bar Ḥiyya⁸⁷In the Babli, he appears without a title. He was a student of Rav in Babylonia who immigrated into Galilee., a quarter [log] of fish sauce in two seah of fish and fish sauce. A case came before Rebbi Joshia and he instructed accordingly⁸⁸Practice is decided following R. Jehudah in a lenient way. The Babli (Ḥulin 99b) accepts the ruling of R. Jehudah in the interpretation of R. Abbahu which counts only the amount of sauce..

We have stated thus⁸⁹A similar text in Tosephta 9:1, in the name of R. Yose ben R. Jehudah.: “When has this been said? If he scoops out piece by piece and puts them before himself, he has to proceed in the way indicated⁹⁰If he scooped out from the barrel to prepare the fish as food and found 10 zin of impure fish, all is forbidden. But if he scooped out and threw the impure away, so that at no time there are 10 zin of impure fish before him, the fish fluid itself is bland and does not forbid anything even if the total sum of impure fish would have been greater than 10 zin. (Explanation of R. S. Lieberman.). But if he scoops out piece by piece and throws them away, even more than was indicated is permitted.”

⁹¹The same paragraph appears in Avodah Zarah 2:10 (fol. 42a). In that text, instead of גבונתא one reads זבונתא “merchandise”. Since both texts speak about food that possibly is forbidden, the reading here seems preferable (but גבונתא possibly does not mean “cheese”.) In Avodah Zarah, the paragraph follows a lenient ruling of Rebbi referring to a shipload of wine amphoras. In both cases, it is not clear whether the expression “by some pretext” refers to the previous very lenient statement (and should be translated “as a subterfuge”) or to the following. Therefore, it is left to the reader to decide where or whether to split both paragraphs. By some pretext, cheese was mixed up⁹²The percentages of forbidden cheese could no longer be ascertained for each individual piece.. Rebbi Ḥaggai asked Rebbi Abba bar Zavda. He said to them, the property of the public cannot be forbidden⁹³This argument usually is used for public property, such as public baths dedicated to a pagan deity; cf. Ševi‘it Chapter 8, Note 132. Here it is extended to mixed cargo on a common carrier. This is a subterfuge.. Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi said, Rebbi Isaac asked: Is not Caius Lycus written on these documents, and you say, by a pretext⁹⁴This refers to a statement in Giṭṭin 1:1 (fol. 43b) that a divorce document is valid even if its witnesses sign with Roman (Caius) or Greek (Λύκος “wolf”) names. It is stated there that this refers only to divorce documents executed outside the Land since the Jews of the diaspora have Gentile names and, therefore, there is a presumption that the document was signed by Jews. Since without the document the divorced wife could never remarry, it is the duty of the rabbinic court of her home town to find ways to validate a divorce document for which no replacement could be demanded from overseas. This is a situation in which the rabbis would be forced to find pretexts to declare the document valid. However, the statement is an absolute one, valid also for cases in which there is no urgency.?

“Rebbi Ẓadoq testified that the fluid exuding from impure locusts is pure.⁹⁵Locust fluid is not a fluid that can prepare food for impurity; cf. Demay Chapter 2, Note 141.” In what respect is it pure? It is pure not to prepare. But to make impure⁹⁶This means, forbidden as food. (Commentary of R. Abraham ben David to Idiut 7:2.), the most minute amount makes impure.