Avodah Zarah 67B

טעמו ולא ממשו ⁠— אסור, ואין לוקין עליו, ואם ריבה טעם לפגם ⁠— מותר.

But if only the flavor of the forbidden food is recognizable in the mixture, but not its substance, as it was completely dissolved into the permitted food, the mixture is forbidden, but one is not flogged for consuming it. And if the forbidden food amplified the flavor of the permitted food to its detriment, it is permitted.

ולימא: אם נתן טעם לפגם ⁠— מותר! הא קמשמע לן, דאף על גב דאיכא מילי אחרנייתא דפגמה בהדיה, והלכתא כלישנא בתרא דריש לקיש.

The Talmud asks: But then let R' Yoḥanan say: If the forbidden food imparts flavor to the detriment of the mixture, it is permitted. Why does he use the term: Amplified? The Talmud answers that this is what R' Yoḥanan teaches us: That even if there are other substances that detracted from the flavor of the mixture along with the forbidden food, e.g., insufficient salt or excessive seasoning, this is not taken into consideration; since the forbidden food detracted from its flavor, the mixture is permitted. The Talmud comments: And the halakha is in accordance with the last version of the statement of Reish Lakish.

אמר רב כהנא: מדברי כולם נלמד נותן טעם לפגם מותר. אמר ליה אביי: בשלמא מכולהו לחיי, אלא דריש לקיש ⁠— ״אמרו״ קאמר, וליה לא סבירא ליה.

§ Rav Kahana says: From the statements of all the amora’im who were cited, namely, Shmuel, R' Yoḥanan, and Reish Lakish, we learn that if a forbidden food imparts flavor to a permitted food to the detriment of the mixture, it is permitted. Abaye said to him: Granted, from all the rest of them this conclusion is very well; but how can this be concluded from the statement of Reish Lakish? He says only that the rabbis said that if a forbidden food imparts flavor to a permitted food to its detriment, the mixture is permitted. Perhaps he is only citing what others said and he himself does not hold accordingly.