That the nazirite not drink wine or all types of spirits: That the nazirite not drink wine or all types of spirits, the essential [ingredient] of which be wine, which is the juice of grapes. As with the juice of other fruits, even though they are called spirits, they are not prohibited to the nazirite, except when they are in a mixture of that which comes out of the grape. And about this is it stated (Numbers 6:3), “From wine and spirit shall he abstain, etc. and any marination of grapes shall he not drink” — meaning to say that any mixture that has grapes is included in the prohibition. And it broadened this prevention and stated that even if the wine or the spirit that wine mixed into became vinegar, it is prohibited to drink it. And about this, the Scripture stated, “wine vinegar and spirit vinegar shall he not drink.” And these are not two [separate] negative commandments, meaning to say one about wine and one about vinegar; as behold, it did not state, “wine vinegar shall he not drink and spirit vinegar shall he not drink.” And we have learned from here that one who drinks wine and vinegar is only lashed for one [commandment].
I will write that which I have known about the roots of the matter of naziriteness in the commandment of growing the hair of the nazirite in this Order (Sefer HaChinukh 374). And the distancing of the nazirite from all mixtures of wine is all from the reason that is written there.
From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Nazir 34b) that anything that comes out of the grape, whether it is the fruit or the refuse — meaning to say the zag which is the peel, and the chartsan, which is the seed that is inside it — is forbidden to the nazirite, and as it is explained in the Scripture. But behold, the leaves, the shoots, the vines and the immature berries (smadar), they are permissible; since they are not fruit and not refuse, but are considered like the tree. [This] and the rest of the many details of the commandment are elucidated in the tractate that is built on this, and that is Tractate Nazir.
And this prohibition is practiced by males and females in every place and at all times, as anyone who vows [to become a] nazirite is obligated to abstain from wine, spirits, wine vinegar, spirit vinegar and from any grape marinade. And one who transgresses this and drinks a reviit of a log of wine, or ate a kazayit of grapes that are wet or dry, or from their refuse which is the seeds and the peels, is liable for lashes. And even if he ate a kazayit from among them all — meaning to say that he took a little from each one of those [items] that we mentioned, until among all of them, there was the measurement of a kazayit — and he ate it, he is lashed. As all prohibitions of the nazirite combine one with the other to a kazayit, to require lashes because of them. But other prohibitions in the Torah do not combine one with the other, except for the meat of a carcass with the meat of a “torn” animal (tereifah), and a sacrifice disqualified by the wrong thought (piggul) with a sacrifice disqualified by its lateness (notar), which combine. And the six items in the thanksgiving sacrifice, which are fat, meat, fine flour, oil, wine, and bread also combine. And it is not necessary to say that everything that is of one name combines, such as the carcass of an ox, the carcass of a lamb and the carcass of a gazelle, and similar to this (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Forbidden Foods 4:17).
And they, may their memory be blessed, taught us that it is a prohibited substance with a prohibited substance that combines to [form a] kazayit, like those that we mentioned. But a permitted substance does not combine with a prohibited substance, regarding all of the prohibitions in the Torah. [This] means to say that one who eats half [a kazayit] of a prohibited substance and half [a kazayit] of a permitted substance mixed together will not be liable for lashes — whether in the prohibitions of the nazirite, or whether in all of the other prohibitions. And also even with consecrated foods, meat and milk, and expurgations [of the vessels] of the gentiles — which [all] include novelties — when he did not eat a kazayit of the prohibited matter, there is never a liability for lashes in the thing, as is explained in Pesachim 44b and Nazir 37b. As the law is not like Rabbi Akiva, who holds like that in Tractate Nazir 37a [in] the chapter [entitled] Shloshah Minin, and learns it from the passage of “and any marination.” Rather, the law is like the Rabbis who disagree with him and establish that verse there, and so [too] in Tractate Pesachim 44b, to learn from it that the taste of the prohibited matter is prohibited just like its essence (its solid mass) — whether for the nazirite or whether for all of the prohibited substances in the Torah. And so is it said there, “And [does] this ‘and any marination’ come [to teach] that? That one is required to [teach] like that which was taught, ‘“And any marination” is to give [that] the taste be like its essence. As where one soaked grapes in water and the water has the taste of wine, [it is forbidden]. From here you derive [the law] with regard to all prohibited substances in the Torah.’ Just as with regard to a nazirite, etc. [continuing to] whose [opinion] is this? The Rabbis. However, some [and I] say [it is] like Rabbi Akiva.”
And many interpretations have been said about the understanding of “the taste is like the essence.” And one of them — and it appears to be the best — is that any prohibited substance that is not with its type, but rather is mixed into a permissible substance and gave taste to it; about this they, may their memory be blessed, said that the taste of the prohibited matter is forbidden, like the essence of the prohibited matter. This excludes if it mixed into its [own] type [of substance], as there is no giving off [a different] taste here. And for [the previous matter], this passage of “and any marination” was required. As if it were not that we learned this thing from this passage, I would have determined that any prohibited substance that mixed into a permissible substance — in its type, or even not in its type — is nullified by the majority [constituted by the permissible substance], based on the well-known principle of the Torah, that one [part] is nullified in two [parts]. [This] means to say, in a majority, as the expression, “two” is not [meant to be] exact. And once we have known this, we should determine the taste to be like the substance. And what is the law that is well-known to us regarding the substance without a mixture? That one who eats a kazayit of a prohibited substance without the elapsing of the measurement [of time] of eating a peras is lashed for it. But if more than this elapsed, he is exempted. And this same law is said with its taste: That if a kazayit of the taste of the prohibited substance mixed into the permissible substance [such that it could be eaten] within the [time] required to eat a peras, and he ate from it the measurement of eating a peras without the mentioned elapsing [of time], he is lashed for it. [But] if he ate less than this, or if less than this measurement of the prohibited substance mixed into it, he is not lashed for it. And, likewise, some of the commentators said that included in lashing for the prohibition of its taste without its essence is that any time the prohibited substance gave so much taste into the permitted substance as if a kazayit of the prohibited substance was mixed into it, [such that it could be eaten] within the [time] required to eat a peras — even though we do not know the measurement of how much of the prohibited substance [itself] entered into it. And this is not the opinion of Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam), may his memory be blessed, according to what appears from his words in Separation (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Naziriteship 5:4) and in Holiness (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Forbidden Foods 15:3). Rather, according to his opinion, we never administer lashes until we know that he ate a kazayit of the substance of the prohibited substance — either on its own or in a mixture [wherein it constitutes] a kazayit [such that it could be eaten] within the [time] required to eat a peras. And according to this reasoning, that which they said there, “‘Marination’ is to give [that] the taste be like its essence; such as where one soaked grapes in water,” is said regarding the matter of the prohibition, and not about lashes.
שֶׁלֹּא יִשְׁתֶּה הַנָּזִיר יַיִן אוֹ כָּל מִינֵי שֵׁכָר – שֶׁלֹּא יִשְׁתֶּה הַנָּזִיר יַיִן אוֹ כָּל מִינֵי שֵׁכָר שֶׁעִקַּר עֵרוּבוֹ יִהְיֶה יַיִן, שֶׁהוּא מֵחַל הָעֲנָבִים. דְּאִלּוּ מֵחַל שְׁאָר פֵּרוֹת, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּקְרָא שֵׁכָר לֹא נֶאֱסַר עַל הַנָּזִיר, אֶלָּא בְּתַעֲרֹבֶת הַיּוֹצֵא מִן הַגֶּפֶן, וְעַל זֶה נֶאֱמַר (במדבר ו ג) מִיַּיִן וְשֵׁכָר יַזִּיר וְגוֹ'. וְכָל מִשְׁרַת עֲנָבִים לֹא יִשְׁתֶּה. כְּלוֹמַר, שֶׁכָּל תַּעֲרֹבֶת שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ עֲנָבִים בִּכְלַל הָאִסּוּר. וְהִפְלִיג בַּמְּנִיעָה וְאָמַר, שֶׁאֲפִלּוּ נִתְחַמֵּץ הַיַּיִן אוֹ הַשֵּׁכָר שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב הַיַּיִן עִמּוֹ, אָסוּר לִשְׁתּוֹתוֹ, וְעַל זֶה אָמַר הַכָּתוּב, חֹמֶץ יַיִן וְחֹמֶץ שֵׁכָר לֹא יִשְׁתֶּה. וְאֵין אֵלּוּ שְׁנֵי לָאוִין, כְּלוֹמַר, לָאו בְּיַיִן וְלָאו אַחֵר בְּחֹמֶץ, שֶׁהֲרֵי לֹא אָמַר יַיִן לֹא יִשְׁתֶּה וְחֹמֶץ יַיִן לֹא יִשְׁתֶּה. וְלָמַדְנוּ מֵעַתָּה, כִּי הַשּׁוֹתֶה יַיִן וְחֹמֶץ אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה אֶלָּא עַל אַחַת.
That the nazirite not drink wine or all types of spirits: That the nazirite not drink wine or all types of spirits, the essential [ingredient] of which be wine, which is the juice of grapes. As with the juice of other fruits, even though they are called spirits, they are not prohibited to the nazirite, except when they are in a mixture of that which comes out of the grape. And about this is it stated (Numbers 6:3), “From wine and spirit shall he abstain, etc. and any marination of grapes shall he not drink” — meaning to say that any mixture that has grapes is included in the prohibition. And it broadened this prevention and stated that even if the wine or the spirit that wine mixed into became vinegar, it is prohibited to drink it. And about this, the Scripture stated, “wine vinegar and spirit vinegar shall he not drink.” And these are not two [separate] negative commandments, meaning to say one about wine and one about vinegar; as behold, it did not state, “wine vinegar shall he not drink and spirit vinegar shall he not drink.” And we have learned from here that one who drinks wine and vinegar is only lashed for one [commandment].
מִשָּׁרְשֵׁי עִנְיַן הַנְּזִירוּת אֶכְתֹּב בְּמִצְוַת גִּדּוּל שְׂעַר נָזִיר בְּסֵדֶר זֶה (מצוה שעד) מָה שֶׁיָּדַעְתִּי וְגֹדֶל הַרְחָקַת הַנָּזִיר מִכָּל תַּעֲרֹבֶת הַיַּיִן הַכֹּל מִן הַטַּעַם הַכָּתוּב שָׁם.
I will write that which I have known about the roots of the matter of naziriteness in the commandment of growing the hair of the nazirite in this Order (Sefer HaChinukh 374). And the distancing of the nazirite from all mixtures of wine is all from the reason that is written there.
מִדִּינֵי הַמִּצְוָה. מָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (נזיר לד ב), שֶׁכָּל הַיּוֹצֵא מִן הַגֶּפֶן בֵּין פְּרִי בֵּין פְּסֹלֶת, כְּלוֹמַר, הַזָּג שֶׁהִיא הַקְּלִפָּה, וְהַחַרְצָן שֶׁהוּא הַזֶּרַע שֶׁבְּתוֹכוֹ, אָסוּר לַנָּזִיר. וּכְמוֹ שֶׁמְּפֹרָשׁ בַּכָּתוּב, אֲבָל הֶעָלִין וְהַלּוּלָבִין וְהַגְּפָנִים וְהַסְּמָדַר הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מֻתָּרִין שֶׁאֵינָן לֹא פְּרִי וְלֹא פְּסֹלֶת, אֶלָּא כְּמוֹ עֵץ הֵם נֶחְשָׁבִים. וְיֶתֶר רֻבֵּי פְּרָטֵי הַמִּצְוָה מְבֹאָרִין בַּמַּסֶּכְתָּא הַבְּנוּיָה עַל זֶה וְהִיא מַסֶּכֶת נָזִיר (פרק שלשה מינין).
From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Nazir 34b) that anything that comes out of the grape, whether it is the fruit or the refuse — meaning to say the zag which is the peel, and the chartsan, which is the seed that is inside it — is forbidden to the nazirite, and as it is explained in the Scripture. But behold, the leaves, the shoots, the vines and the immature berries (smadar), they are permissible; since they are not fruit and not refuse, but are considered like the tree. [This] and the rest of the many details of the commandment are elucidated in the tractate that is built on this, and that is Tractate Nazir.
וְנוֹהֵג אִסּוּר זֶה בִּזְכָרִים וּנְקֵבוֹת בְּכָל מָקוֹם וּבְכָל זְמַן, שֶׁכָּל מִי שֶׁנָּדַר נְזִירוּת חַיָּב לְהַזִּיר מִיַּיִן וְשֵׁכָר, וְחֹמֶץ יַיִן וְחֹמֶץ שֵׁכָר, וּמִכָּל מִשְׁרַת עֲנָבִים. וְהָעוֹבֵר עַל זֶה וְשָׁתָה רְבִיעִית לֹג יַיִן, אוֹ אָכַל כַּזַּיִת עֲנָבִים לַחִים, אוֹ יְבֵשִׁים, אוֹ מִפְּסֹלֶת שֶׁלָּהֶם שֶׁהוּא הַחַרְצַנִּים וְהַזַּגִּין חַיָּב מַלְקוּת. וַאֲפִלּוּ אָכַל כַּזַּיִת בֵּין הַכֹּל, כְּלוֹמַר שֶׁלָּקַח מְעַט מְעַט מִכָּל אֶחָד מֵאֵלּוּ שֶׁזָּכַרְנוּ עַד שֶׁיִּהְיוּ בֵּין כֻּלָּם שִׁעוּר כַּזַּיִת וַאֲכָלוֹ לוֹקֶה, שֶׁכָּל אִסּוּרֵי נָזִיר מִצְטָרְפִין זֶה עִם זֶה לְכַזַּיִת לְהַלְקוֹת עֲלֵיהֶן, אֲבָל שְׁאָר אִסּוּרִין שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה אֵין מִצְטָרְפִין זֶה עִם זֶה, חוּץ מִבְּשַׂר נְבֵלָה עִם בְּשַׂר טְרֵפָה, וּפִגּוּל עִם נוֹתָר שֶׁמִּצְטָרְפִין. וְשִׁשָּׁה דְּבָרִים שֶׁבְּקָרְבַּן תּוֹדָה, שֶׁהֵן חֵלֶב וּבָשָׂר וְסֹלֶת וְשֶׁמֶן וְיַיִן וְלֶחֶם גַּם כֵּן מִצְטָרְפִין, וְאֵין צֹרֶךְ לוֹמַר שֶׁכָּל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא מִשֵּׁם אֶחָד שֶׁמִּצְטָרֵף, כְּגוֹן נִבְלַת שׁוֹר וְנִבְלַת שֶׂה וְנִבְלַת צְבִי וְכָל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה (רמב"ם מאכלות אסורות פ"ד הי"ז).
And this prohibition is practiced by males and females in every place and at all times, as anyone who vows [to become a] nazirite is obligated to abstain from wine, spirits, wine vinegar, spirit vinegar and from any grape marinade. And one who transgresses this and drinks a reviit of a log of wine, or ate a kazayit of grapes that are wet or dry, or from their refuse which is the seeds and the peels, is liable for lashes. And even if he ate a kazayit from among them all — meaning to say that he took a little from each one of those [items] that we mentioned, until among all of them, there was the measurement of a kazayit — and he ate it, he is lashed. As all prohibitions of the nazirite combine one with the other to a kazayit, to require lashes because of them. But other prohibitions in the Torah do not combine one with the other, except for the meat of a carcass with the meat of a “torn” animal (tereifah), and a sacrifice disqualified by the wrong thought (piggul) with a sacrifice disqualified by its lateness (notar), which combine. And the six items in the thanksgiving sacrifice, which are fat, meat, fine flour, oil, wine, and bread also combine. And it is not necessary to say that everything that is of one name combines, such as the carcass of an ox, the carcass of a lamb and the carcass of a gazelle, and similar to this (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Forbidden Foods 4:17).
וְלִמְּדוּנוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה, שֶׁאִסּוּר בְּאִסּוּר הוּא שֶׁמִּצְטָרֵף לְכַזַּיִת, כְּאִלּוּ שֶׁזָּכַרְנוּ, אֲבָל הֶתֵּר אֵינוֹ מִצְטָרֵף לְאִסּוּר בְּכָל הָאִסּוּרִין שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה, כְּלוֹמַר שֶׁמִּי שֶׁאָכַל חֲצִי זַיִת אָסוּר וַחֲצִי זַיִת הֶתֵּר מְעֹרָבִין בְּיַחַד לֹא יִתְחַיֵּב מַלְקוּת, בֵּין בְּאִסּוּרֵי נָזִיר בֵּין בְּכָל שְׁאָר הָאִסּוּרִין, וַאֲפִלּוּ בְּקָדָשִׁים וּבָשָׂר בְּחָלָב וְגִעוּלֵי גּוֹיִם שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהֶם קְצָת חִדּוּשׁ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁמְּפֹרָשׁ בִּפְסָחִים (מד, ב) וּבְנָזִיר (לז, ב), גַּם כֵּן מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁלֹּא אָכַל כַּזַּיִת מִן הָאָסוּר אֵין חִיּוּב מַלְקוּת בַּדָּבָר לְעוֹלָם, שֶׁאֵין הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא דִּסְבִירָא לֵהּ הָכִי בְּמַסֶּכֶת נָזִיר פֶּרֶק שְׁלֹשָׁה מִינִין (שם א) וְיָלֵיף לָהּ מִקְּרָא דִּוְכָל מִשְׁרַת. אֶלָּא הֲלָכָה כְּרַבָּנָן דִּפְלִיגִי עֲלֵהּ וּמוֹקְמִי הַאי קְרָא הָתָם וְכֵן בְּמַסֶּכֶת פְּסָחִים, (שם) לִלְמֹד מִמֶּנּוּ שֶׁטַּעַם הָאִסּוּר אָסוּר כְּמוֹ עִקָּרוֹ, בֵּין בְּנָזִיר בֵּין בְּכָל אִסּוּרִין שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה, וְכֵן נֶאֱמַר שָׁם, וְהַאי וְכָל מִשְׁרַת לְהָכִי הוּא דַּאֲתָא, הַהוּא מִבְּעֵי לֵהּ לְכִדְתַנְיָא מִשְׁרַת לִתֵּן טַעַם כְּעִקָּר, שֶׁאִם שָׁרָה עֲנָבָיו בְּמַיִם וְיֵשׁ בָּהֶם טַעַם יַיִן אָסוּר. מִכָּאן אַתָּה דָּן לְכָל אִסּוּרִין שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה, וּמָה נָזִיר וכו', עַד הָא מַנִּי רַבָּנָן, וְאִיכָּא [וַאֲנָא] דְּאָמְרִי כְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא.
And they, may their memory be blessed, taught us that it is a prohibited substance with a prohibited substance that combines to [form a] kazayit, like those that we mentioned. But a permitted substance does not combine with a prohibited substance, regarding all of the prohibitions in the Torah. [This] means to say that one who eats half [a kazayit] of a prohibited substance and half [a kazayit] of a permitted substance mixed together will not be liable for lashes — whether in the prohibitions of the nazirite, or whether in all of the other prohibitions. And also even with consecrated foods, meat and milk, and expurgations [of the vessels] of the gentiles — which [all] include novelties — when he did not eat a kazayit of the prohibited matter, there is never a liability for lashes in the thing, as is explained in Pesachim 44b and Nazir 37b. As the law is not like Rabbi Akiva, who holds like that in Tractate Nazir 37a [in] the chapter [entitled] Shloshah Minin, and learns it from the passage of “and any marination.” Rather, the law is like the Rabbis who disagree with him and establish that verse there, and so [too] in Tractate Pesachim 44b, to learn from it that the taste of the prohibited matter is prohibited just like its essence (its solid mass) — whether for the nazirite or whether for all of the prohibited substances in the Torah. And so is it said there, “And [does] this ‘and any marination’ come [to teach] that? That one is required to [teach] like that which was taught, ‘“And any marination” is to give [that] the taste be like its essence. As where one soaked grapes in water and the water has the taste of wine, [it is forbidden]. From here you derive [the law] with regard to all prohibited substances in the Torah.’ Just as with regard to a nazirite, etc. [continuing to] whose [opinion] is this? The Rabbis. However, some [and I] say [it is] like Rabbi Akiva.”
וּפֵרוּשׁ טַעַם כְּעִקָּר הַרְבֵּה פֵּרוּשִׁים נֶאֶמְרוּ בּוֹ, וְאֶחָד מֵהֶם, וְהוּא הַטּוֹב לְפִי הַדּוֹמֶה, שֶׁכָּל אִסּוּר שֶׁאֵינוֹ בְּמִינוֹ אֶלָּא שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בְּתוֹךְ הֶתֵּר וְנָתַן טַעַם בּוֹ, לְאַפּוֹקֵי אִם נִתְעָרֵב בְּמִינוֹ, שֶׁאֵין כָּאן נְתִינַת טַעַם, עַל זֶה אָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה שֶׁטַּעַם הָאִסּוּר אָסוּר כְּמוֹ עִקָּרוֹ שֶׁל אִסּוּר, וְלָזֶה הֻצְרַךְ מִקְרָא זֶה דִּוְכָל מִשְׁרַת, שֶׁאִם לֹא שֶׁלָּמַדְנוּ דָּבָר זֶה מִן הַמִּקְרָא הַזֶּה הָיִיתִי דָּן שֶׁכָּל שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב אִסּוּר בְּהֶתֵּר בְּמִינוֹ אוֹ אֲפִלּוּ בְּשֶׁאֵינוֹ מִינוֹ, שֶׁיִּבָּטֵל בְּרֹב מִן הַכְּלָל הַיָּדוּעַ לָנוּ מִדִּין הַתּוֹרָה דְּחַד בִּתְרֵי בָּטֵל, כְּלוֹמַר בְּרֻבָּא, דִּלְשׁוֹן תְּרֵי לָאו דַּוְקָא. וְאַחַר שֶׁיָּדַעְנוּ זֶה יֵשׁ לָנוּ לָדוּן הַטַּעַם כְּמוֹ הַמַּמָּשׁ. וּמָה הוּא הַדִּין הַיָּדוּעַ לָנוּ בְּמַמָּשׁוֹ מִבְּלִי תַּעֲרֹבֶת? שֶׁמִּי שֶׁאָכַל כַּזַּיִת אִסּוּר מִבְּלִי שְׁהִיַּת שִׁעוּר אֲכִילַת פְּרָס שֶׁלּוֹקֶה עָלָיו, אֲבָל שָׁהָה יוֹתֵר מִזֶּה פָּטוּר, וְזֶה הַדִּין בְּעַצְמוֹ הוּא שֶׁנֹּאמַר בְּטַעְמוֹ, שֶׁאִם נִתְעָרֵב מִן הָאִסּוּר בְּהֶתֵּר כַּזַּיִת בִּכְדֵי אֲכִילַת פְּרָס וְאָכַל מִמֶּנּוּ שִׁעוּר אֲכִילַת פְּרָס מִבְּלִי שְׁהִיָּה הַנִּזְכֶּרֶת לוֹקֶה עָלָיו, אָכַל מִמֶּנּוּ פָּחוֹת מִכֵּן אוֹ שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בּוֹ מִן הָאִסּוּר פָּחוֹת מִשִּׁעוּר זֶה אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה עָלָיו. וּכְמוֹ כֵן אָמְרוּ קְצָת הַמְּפָרְשִׁים, שֶׁבִּכְלַל אִסּוּר טַעְמוֹ וְלֹא מַמָּשׁוֹ לְהַלְקוֹת עָלָיו הוּא, כָּל זְמַן שֶׁנָּתַן הָאִסּוּר טַעַם בַּהֶתֵּר כָּל כָּךְ כְּאִלּוּ נִתְעָרֵב בּוֹ אִסּוּר כַּזַּיִת בִּכְדֵי אֲכִילַת פְּרָס, וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא יָדַעְנוּ כַּמָּה שִׁעוּר נִכְנָס בּוֹ מִמַּמָּשׁוּת הָאִסּוּר. וְלֹא כָּךְ דַּעַת הָרַב מֹשֶׁה בֶּן מַיְמוֹן זִכְרוֹנוֹ לִבְרָכָה לְפִי הַנִּרְאֶה מִדְּבָרָיו בְּהַפְלָאָה (נזירות ה ד) וּקְדֻשָּׁה (מאכלות אסורות טו, ג) אֶלָּא דְּלָא לָקֵי לְעוֹלָם לְדַעְתּוֹ עַד דַּעְתֵּנוּ שֶׁאָכַל מַמָּשׁוּת הָאִסּוּר כַּזַּיִת, אוֹ בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ, אוֹ בְּתַעֲרֹבֶת כַּזַּיִת בִּכְדֵי אֲכִילַת פְּרָס, וּלְפִי סְבָרָתוֹ זֹאת, מָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ שָׁם מִשְׁרַת לִתֵּן טַעַם כְּעִקָּר, כְּגוֹן שֶׁשָּׁרָה עֲנָבִים בַּמַּיִם לְעִנְיָן אִסּוּר הוּא שֶׁאָמְרוּ כֵּן וְלֹא לְמַלְקוּת.
And many interpretations have been said about the understanding of “the taste is like the essence.” And one of them — and it appears to be the best — is that any prohibited substance that is not with its type, but rather is mixed into a permissible substance and gave taste to it; about this they, may their memory be blessed, said that the taste of the prohibited matter is forbidden, like the essence of the prohibited matter. This excludes if it mixed into its [own] type [of substance], as there is no giving off [a different] taste here. And for [the previous matter], this passage of “and any marination” was required. As if it were not that we learned this thing from this passage, I would have determined that any prohibited substance that mixed into a permissible substance — in its type, or even not in its type — is nullified by the majority [constituted by the permissible substance], based on the well-known principle of the Torah, that one [part] is nullified in two [parts]. [This] means to say, in a majority, as the expression, “two” is not [meant to be] exact. And once we have known this, we should determine the taste to be like the substance. And what is the law that is well-known to us regarding the substance without a mixture? That one who eats a kazayit of a prohibited substance without the elapsing of the measurement [of time] of eating a peras is lashed for it. But if more than this elapsed, he is exempted. And this same law is said with its taste: That if a kazayit of the taste of the prohibited substance mixed into the permissible substance [such that it could be eaten] within the [time] required to eat a peras, and he ate from it the measurement of eating a peras without the mentioned elapsing [of time], he is lashed for it. [But] if he ate less than this, or if less than this measurement of the prohibited substance mixed into it, he is not lashed for it. And, likewise, some of the commentators said that included in lashing for the prohibition of its taste without its essence is that any time the prohibited substance gave so much taste into the permitted substance as if a kazayit of the prohibited substance was mixed into it, [such that it could be eaten] within the [time] required to eat a peras — even though we do not know the measurement of how much of the prohibited substance [itself] entered into it. And this is not the opinion of Rabbi Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam), may his memory be blessed, according to what appears from his words in Separation (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Naziriteship 5:4) and in Holiness (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Forbidden Foods 15:3). Rather, according to his opinion, we never administer lashes until we know that he ate a kazayit of the substance of the prohibited substance — either on its own or in a mixture [wherein it constitutes] a kazayit [such that it could be eaten] within the [time] required to eat a peras. And according to this reasoning, that which they said there, “‘Marination’ is to give [that] the taste be like its essence; such as where one soaked grapes in water,” is said regarding the matter of the prohibition, and not about lashes.