Answer (Mar bar Rav Ashi): In that case there is no concern. All realize that he has no other cloak because he washes its belt with it (or girds the belt over his jacket while washing the cloak, because he does not have another cloak).

(Mishnah): If a drop of milk fell on a piece of meat in a pot:

If the milk gave Ta'am to the piece, it is forbidden;

If the pot was stirred, the milk gives Ta'am to the contents in the pot. It is all forbidden.

(Gemara - Abaye): Regarding all Isurim, if Heter absorbed Ta'am from Isur, it becomes forbidden mid'Oraisa, even if the Isur itself is not present.

If this law were only mid'Rabanan, we could not explain why we don't learn from meat and milk! (The meat is forbidden due to absorbed taste of milk, even though the milk is not intact.)

Suggestion: Perhaps we do not learn from meat and milk, because it is a Chidush. (Rashi - each is permitted by itself, but together they are forbidden. Alternatively, one may not cook them, even without eating them. Tosfos - they are permitted when mixed together (cold); only cooking forbids them.)

Rejection: If it is a Chidush, it should be forbidden even if no Ta'am is absorbed!

Rejection (Rava): (Perhaps if Heter absorbed taste of other Isurim, it is permitted mid'Oraisa. Meat and milk is a Chidush. Even so, meat and milk become forbidden only if Ta'am was absorbed, because) the Torah forbids normal cooking. (There is enough milk to give Ta'am to the meat.)

(Rav): Once the milk gives Ta'am to one piece (of meat), that piece becomes like a Nevelah, and forbids all the pieces, because they are the same species.

Question (Mar Zutra brei d'Rav Mari): Rav's law is like R. Yehudah, who says that an Isur is never Batel Min b'Mino (when mixed with its own species);

Must we say that he argues with Rava?

(Rava): R. Yehudah holds that if Isur is mixed with Heter of Mino and Eino Mino (another species), we ignore Mino, and it is Batel in Eino Mino (if it does not give taste to Eino Mino).

Answer (Ravina): If the meat was cooking in a thin gravy, Rav agrees with Rava. We ignore the other pieces, and the forbidden piece is Batel in the gravy;

The case is, it was cooking in a thick gravy (full of bits of meat), which is considered Mino, so the forbidden piece cannot be Batel.

Question: Does Rav permit Efshar Lesochto? (If food 'A' received Ta'am from an Isur (and became forbidden), and then 'A' was cooked with more Heter (enough for Bitul), do we say that the forbidden Ta'am exudes, and 'A' is permitted?)

Suggestion: If he permitted Efshar Lesochto, the piece would not become like Nevelah (and forbid the rest of the pot. Rather, it would become permitted, if there is enough food in the pot!)

Answer: Rather, he forbids Efshar Lesochto.

(Rav, R. Chanina, and R. Yochanan): Efshar Lesochto is forbidden.

(Shmuel, R. Shimon bar Rebbi, Reish Lakish): It is permitted.

Question: Does Rav really forbid?!

(Rav): If a K'Zayis of meat fell into a cauldron of milk, the meat is forbidden, and the milk is permitted.

If Rav forbids Efshar Lesochto, why is the milk permitted?

Some milk was absorbed in the meat, and became forbidden. When it exudes from the meat, it should forbid all the milk!

Answer #1: Indeed, Rav forbids Efshar Lesochto;

Meat and milk is different. It says "do not cook a kid in its mother's milk" - if one did so, only the kid becomes forbidden, but not the milk.

Objection: Rav does not say so!

(Rav): If Reuven cooked half a k'Zayis of meat with half a k'Zayis of milk, he is not lashed for cooking it, but one who eats (all of) it is lashed.

If only the meat becomes forbidden, he cannot be lashed for eating half a k'Zayis of Isur!

Answer #2: Rather, Rav holds that also the milk becomes forbidden. The case is, the meat fell into a cauldron of boiling milk. The meat only absorbs. It does not emit (milk that it absorbed).

Question: When it stops boiling, it will emit the absorbed milk!

Answer: The case is, the meat was removed while the milk was still boiling.

(Rav): If one cooked half a k'Zayis of meat with half a k'Zayis of milk, he is not lashed for cooking it, but one who eats (all of) it is lashed.

Question: In any case, this is difficult!

If the meat and milk join up, Reuven should be lashed for cooking it!

If they do not join up, one who eats it should not be lashed!

Answer: Really, they don't join up. One is lashed for eating it when half a k'Zayis of meat and half a k'Zayis of milk were taken from a pot in which a k'Zayis of meat was cooked with a k'Zayis of milk. (According to Rav, this is the primary Isur of the Torah. Even if the Torah forbids cooking a partial Shi'ur, the Isur is is only due to Chetzi Shi'ur. It is not less the Torah Isur of meat and milk.)

(Levi): One is lashed even for cooking together half a k'Zayis of each.

(Levi - Beraisa): Just like one is lashed for eating half a k'Zayis of each, one is lashed for cooking them together;

One is liable for cooking to the point at which a Nochri would eat it.

Tana'im argue about whether Isur can become permitted.

(Beraisa - R. Yehudah): If a drop of milk fell on a piece of meat in a pot, and the milk gives Ta'am to the piece, it becomes like Nevelah, and forbids all the pieces, for they are Mino;

Chachamim say, they are forbidden only if it gives Ta'am to the sauce, Kipah (thick gravy with bits of meat) and pieces.

Rebbi: I agree with R. Yehudah when the pot was not stirred or covered. I agree with Chachamim when the pot was stirred or covered.

Question: What does he mean by 'it was not stirred or covered'?

Suggestion: It was not stirred or covered at all.

Rejection: Granted, the piece could absorb the Ta'am of the milk, but it would not give taste to the other pieces! (R. Yehudah would not forbid them.)

Answer: Rather, it was not stirred or covered at first, rather later.

Question: The piece absorbs the Ta'am of the milk, and emits it. Even the piece should become permitted again!

Answer: R. Yehudah forbids Efshar Lesochto.