ADDED GROWTH THAT IS UNLIKE THE SOURCE [Gidulim: Bitul]
(Mishnah): One may not benefit from milk or eggs of Kodshim (for the Mizbe'ach). Me'ilah does not apply to them;
If one was Makdish a hen or donkey (for Bedek ha'Bayis (DH), Me'ilah applies to it and its egg or milk.
(Mishnah): If one was Makdish an empty tree or field, and afterwards it became full, Me'ilah applies to it, but not to its contents;
R. Yosi says, Me'ilah applies also to what later grows in them, for they are Gidulei (things that grow from) Hekdesh.
Nedarim 57b - Question (Yishmael of Yama): If an onion bulb was uprooted in Shemitah and planted in the eighth year, and the added growth is more than the bulb, what is the law?
Perhaps the added growth is permitted, but the bulb is forbidden (like Peros Shemitah)?
Or, perhaps not!
Answer #1 (R. Yitzchak Nafcha): R. Chanina Trisa'ah taught that if a Terumah onion was planted and the added growth is more than the bulb, it is permitted.
Objection (R. Yirmeyah): Two teachings oppose this!
(R. Avahu citing R. Yochanan): If a branch of a sapling (within the three years of Orlah) with fruits was grafted onto a mature tree, even if the fruits grow 200 times larger, they are forbidden.
(R. Yonason): If an onion was planted in a vineyard (what grows is forbidden due to Kil'ai ha'Kerem;) even if the vineyard was later uprooted (and the added growth was 200 times the bulb), the bulb remains forbidden.
Answer #2 (R. Ami): R. Yitzchak said in the name of R. Yochanan that if onions were tithed and planted, when they grow, one tithes the entire amount.
This shows that the bulb is Batel to the additional growth. (Really, R. Yochanan does not hold like R. Avahu said above. Two of the three Amora'im holds that the bulb is Batel.)
Rejection: Perhaps this is only stringent to say that the bulb is Batel.
58b - Answer #3 (Beraisa - R. Shimon ben Elazar): In Sheminis one may eat Chasayos (species in which the seed does not disintegrate) of a Yisrael suspected of transgressing Shemitah.
Inference: The added growth in the eighth year nullifies the bulb (of Shemitah)!
Suggestion: This Beraisa refutes R. Yochanan and R. Yonason (57b).
Rejection (R. Yitzchak): Shemitah is different. Since the Isur comes through land, the Isur can be Batel even while attached to the land.
Menachos 69b - Question (R. Shimon ben Pazi): If grain grew a third before the Omer, and it was detached and replanted after the Omer, and it grew (a little), what is the law?
If the law depends on the Ikar (what was planted), the Omer permitted it. If the law depends on the new growth, it is not permitted until next year's Omer.
Question: We learn from the teachings of R. Avahu and R. Yonason! (The Ikar determines the law.)
Answer: R. Shimon ben Pazi asks about those rulings. Were R. Avahu and R. Yonason sure that the Ikar determines the law, even if this is a leniency?
Or, perhaps they are unsure. They are concerned for stringencies of the Ikar and of the additional growth!
This question is not resolved.
Rosh (Hilchos Orlah 5): If a Breichah (shoot inserted into the ground) was cut (off the tree) and it is full of Peros, if it grew enough so that the initial Pri is not 200 times the new growth, it is forbidden. Therefore, he should detach it immediately, and the Peros are permitted. Similarly, if one saw Kil'ayim in his vineyard and delayed uprooting it until it grew one part in 200, it is forbidden. Similarly, if an old tree with Peros was uprooted and planted elsewhere, if it grew one part in 200, it is forbidden. However, if one grafted a branch of Orlah fruits onto an old tree, the Peros on the branch are permanently forbidden, even if they grew very much. The Heter growth is not Mevatel the Isur.
Perush ha'Rosh (Nedarim 57b DH Gidulav): Surely, what grows (from a Shemitah onion planted in the eighth year) is permitted, even if the Gidulim are less than the initial onion.
Keren Orah (Nedarim 57b DH v'Od): In Peros that are not Chasayos, even if they are Isurei Hana'ah, what grows is permitted. What grows from Hekdesh is permitted (Terumos 9:4), even though Hekdesh is more stringent than other Isurei Hana'ah. R. Yosi holds that Me'ilah applies to Gidulim. We must say that this is for Chasayos. However, in Me'ilah it seems that milk and eggs are more stringent than other Gidulim. Regarding them it was taught Stam that there is Me'ilah. Regarding Peros, there is an argument. R. Yochanan forbids Peros on a sapling grafted onto a mature tree, even if the Peros grow 200 times larger. The Rosh says that also the new growth is forbidden. We must say that the Rosh permits Gidulim only when they are separate from the initial source (e.g. new leaves grow). When the Pri itself gets bigger, it is all mixed.
Ran (Nedarim 57b DH v'Ravu): Yishmael did not ask about a simple majority of new growth. Rather, there was enough new growth that normally would be Mevatel the Isur. The primary Safek is whether the Gidulim, which come from a forbidden source that does not disintegrate, are forbidden like the source. Or, they are like Heter, and they are Mevatel the Isur. He could have asked about the Gidulim themselves. One depends on the other.
Ran (ibid. DH Yaldah): If the branch of the sapling (grafted onto an old tree) had no Peros, is Batel to the old tree (Sotah 43b).
Ran (ibid. DH Af): (If the young branch had fruits,) even if they grew 200 times their initial size, they are forbidden. Even though the growth is Heter, and a branch of a sapling grafted onto an old tree is Batel to the tree, since these Peros were already there, the Gidulim are not Mevatel the source.
Tosfos (Menachos 69b DH Batzel): In Nedarim, from the teachings of R. Avahu and R. Yonason we resolved that it depends on the Ikar. Here we do not bring R. Yanai's teaching, for we follow the two against the one. If one passed a flowerpot through a vineyard, if it grew one part in 200, it is forbidden (Kil'ayim 7:8). This shows that it depends on the addition! There is different for "ha'Mele'ah" teaches that additional growth forbids.
Question: Why was R. Shimon ben Pazi unsure? Surely R. Yochanan is merely stringent. If not, he contradicts his teaching about tithing the entire amount of onions! This shows that we are not lenient to follow the Ikar. Also in Nedarim we said that R. Yochanan is stringent in both directions!
Answer (Tosfos): We said that R. Yochanan is stringent in both directions only regarding planting. When it is not planted, perhaps we follow the Ikar to be lenient or stringent. In Nedarim we asked from a Beraisa, and answered that Shemitah is different. Since the Isur comes through land, the Isur can be Batel even while attached to the land. Why is the Isur of Shemitah considered to be through the land more than Orlah or Kil'ai ha'Kerem? It seems that even Ma'aser would be considered through the land, if not that it depends on final processing. Our Sugya connotes that Chadash is not through the land, for it equates Chadash to Orlah and Kil'ai ha'Kerem.
Shulchan Aruch (YD 294:22): If a Breichah was cut and it is full of Peros, or an old tree with Peros was uprooted and planted elsewhere, or if a branch full of Peros from an old tree was grafted onto a young tree, if it grew enough so that the initial Pri is not 200 times the new growth, it is forbidden. If not, it is permitted. If one grafted a branch of Orlah fruits onto an old tree, the Peros on the branch are permanently forbidden, even if they grew very much.
Beis Yosef (DH Aval): The Ran says that the Gemara asked about whether Gidulim from an Isur source are forbidden. The Rosh holds that Vadai they are permitted. The source cannot be Mevatel the Gidulim.
Shach (32): The Shulchan Aruch connotes like the Rosh, that the Gidulim themselves are permitted.
Shach (33): Gidulim of Heter are not Mevatel the source.
Gra (56): The Yerushalmi learns that the same applies to a tree that was uprooted and replanted from an onion that was planted. One must tithe the entire onion.
Gra (57): The Gemara in Menachos did not settle whether Vadai the law depends on the source, or if it is a Safek, so we are stringent. The Yerushalmi resolved that we are only stringent. The simple explanation of the Amora'im is like the Yerushalmi. This is relevant only to lashes.
Note: Seemingly, there are other consequences. If a Shemitah onion was planted in Sheminis, and one made the Gidulim Terumah on other onions, if Vadai it depends on the Ikar, the Terumah is Vadai invalid.
Shulchan Aruch (296:18): If an onion was planted in a vineyard, and afterwards the vineyard was uprooted, and then onions sprouted from the planted bulb, even if the growth is 200 times the Ikar, the Ikar remains forbidden, for permitted Gidulim are not Mevatel a forbidden Ikar.
Gra (38): This connotes that only the Ikar is forbidden, like we say 'Gidulim are Mevatel the Ikar.' However, the Ran forbids even the Gidulim. The Shulchan Aruch above (294:22) forbids 'the Peros.' This connotes all the Peros, including the Gidulim. This is unlike the Shach there. Rather, it is like the Ran.