hello99 and Sam2-
1) On the subject of ???? ?????? ?????, I wanted to bring a raya to this din of the Issur v’Heter from Rashi, who writes (Chullin 88a):
?????? ?? ????? ??’ – ???”? ??? ??? ????? ????? ???? ????? ????? ???? ????? ???? ??? ??? ???? ????? ??? ??? ????? ??? ???? ???? ????? ??? ???? ????? ????? ???? ?? ????
Accordingly one could infer that should something give ta’am it would be batel mid’oraisa after 60 from zaroa beshelah if you hold that it is a real drasha, even if you don’t consider it ta’am kalush, v’doik heitev.
2) On the subject of 60 by sakanta, I’m not in the sugya, but having just gone through reicha I can tell you it’s a mefurashe Ran (Chullin 32b b’dafei haRif) that 60 is not enough. He says so to explain the gemara in Pesachim (76b) that to eat fish roasted with meat is a problem even according to Levi. However, the mechaber does not pasken like this, because in 97:3 he just says one may not eat the fish with milk, mashma that the fish alone is fine. Being that we hold l’chatchila that even though reicha is nothing it’s still a mah shehu (Rema 108:1), and the Rema is quiet in 89, I would therefore conclude ???? ????? that l’ma’aseh sakanta is also batel in 60, as hello99 assumed.
However, ??????? that someone is madche this raya from 89 and says that the mechaber only said it that way because he was discussing basar b’chalav. ?”?.