The Talmud relates a case in which the skins from the korban Pesach of five different groups became mized together, and it was discovered that one of the five has a disqualifying blemish. The ruling is that all five must be burned (although the groups are exempt from having to make up the obligation on Pesach Sheini, for technical reasons). This passage figures prominently in discussions of halakhic authorities in considering the question of the power of “bitul” to grant positive status. It is understood that in certain cases, a majority (rov) of a permitted substance can overwhelm a lesser amount of prohibited substance and make the entire unit permitted. However, the possibility of using the same process not only to cancel a negative but to grant an affirmative status is the topic of some debate. R. Akiva Eiger (Responsa, 14) discusses this question in regards to tzitzit, in a situation where a string that was not made with the necessary proper intent (l’shmah) is mixed in with many others that were properly made. Based on the above passage, he rules that bitul cannot confer positive status (in that case, the status of a valid korban Pesach) and is ineffective in making that string “l’shmah”. (See also his glosses to Shulchan Arukh, O.C., 11:1, where he pursues a different line of reasoning). Similarly, he writes, a mixture of chametz and matzah, with a majority of the latter, can become permissible to eat on Pesach, but not valid to fulfill the obligation of eating matzah. (This is also the view of the Minchat Chinukh, 10:6; See, however, R. Yosef Engel, Beit HaOtzar II, 18:9, who suggests a proof to the opposite position.) The Responsa Oneg Yom Tov (O.C., 4) goes further in explaining the Talmud’s passage. Not only does korban Pesach status not attach, but even to permit consumption as food is impossible, because, as sanctified material, the animals would have to go through the entire korban process to be permissible to eat. Since the animal was disqualified throughout, this process is ineffective in permitting it at all. The Chavvat Da’at (Y.D. 101:5) offers another reason why the rule of “bittul” is not implemented. In his understanding, the skin represents an idependently significant unit (chatikhah hariuyah l’hitkabbed) and is thus ineligible for bittul. R. Elazar Moshe Horvitz (glosses to Pesachim), however, rejects this possibility, noting that at least parts of the animal should not receive that designation. The Resp. Torat Chesed (I:47) takes issue with the Chavvat Da’at for a number of other reasons, and offers his own approach as to why bittul is ineffective in the case of Pesach. (See also Resp. Shevet HaLevi, III, 104.) The Resp. L’Horot Natan (I, 2) after a lengthy analysis, concludes that tzitzit in the above case cannot acquire the status of “l’shmah” through bittul. See also Resp. Meishiv Davar, O.C. 34, who distinguishes between cases in which validity would be necessary for all the parts of a given unit (such as the Divine Name written in a Torah scroll, when it may not have been written with the proper intent) and instances in which each individual part can be looked at by itself and stand alone, presumed to be valid (such as matzah baked without intent of l’shmah, mixed in with those that were). (See also Ohr Sameach, Tzitzit 1:11, and Hil Ma’achalot Asurot, ch. 15.)