The Shulchan Aruch · Yoreh De'ah
יורה דעה ק״אYoreh De'ah 101
Siman 101 of 402 in Yoreh De'ah — 9 se'ifim
הלכות תערובותAdmixtures· siman 101
Se’if 1א׳
חֲתִיכָה הָרְאוּיָה לְהִתְכַּבֵּד דִּינָהּ כִּבְרִיָּה, דַּאֲפִילוּ בְּאֶלֶף לֹא בְּטֵלָה. וַאֲפִלּוּ אִם הִיא אֲסוּרָה בַּהֲנָאָה, כֵּיוָן שֶׁאִם תִּתְבַּטֵּל הָיְתָה מֻתֶּרֶת וּרְאוּיָה לְהִתְכַּבֵּד. הַגָּה: וַאֲפִלּוּ אֵינָהּ אֲסוּרָה רַק מִדְּרַבָּנָן, אֵינָהּ בְּטֵלָה (בֵּית יוֹסֵף בְּשֵׁם הָרַמְבַּ"ם). וְאִם הוּא סָפֵק אִם רְאוּיָה לְהִתְכַּבֵּד אוֹ לֹא, אַזְלִינָן לְקֻלָּא (אָרֹךְ כְּלָל כ"ה) אֲפִלּוּ הִיא אֲסוּרָה מִדְּאוֹרַיְתָא.
The Law of a Piece Fit to be Served to Guests. It contains nine subsections: A piece [of food] that is fit to be served to guests has the status of a beriah (a whole entity), such that even in a thousand [parts of permitted food] it is not nullified. And even if it is an item from which it is forbidden to derive benefit, [it is not nullified], since if it were to be nullified it would become permitted and fit to be served to guests. Gloss (Rema): And even if it is only forbidden by Rabbinic decree, it is not nullified (Beit Yosef in the name of the Ramban). And if there is a doubt whether it is fit to be served to guests or not, we rule leniently (Aruch Klal 25), even if the underlying prohibition is from the Torah.
Se’if 2ב׳
אֵין לָהּ דִּין חֲתִיכָה הָרְאוּיָה לְהִתְכַּבֵּד, אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן אִסוּרָהּ מֵחֲמַת עַצְמָהּ, כְּגוֹן נְבֵלָה וּבָשָׂר בְּחָלָב; אֲבָל אִם נֶאֶסְרָה מֵחֲמַת שֶׁקִּבְּלָה טַעַם מֵאִסוּר וְלֹא הָיָה בָּהּ ס' לְבַטְּלוֹ, אֲפִלּוּ לְמִי שֶׁסוֹבֵר חֲתִיכָה עַצְמָהּ נַעֲשֵׂית נְבֵלָה אֵין לָהּ דִּין חֲתִיכָה הָרְאוּיָה לְהִתְכַּבֵּד. הַגָּה: וַאֲפִלּוּ חֲתִיכָה שֶׁלֹּא נִמְלְחָה, בְּטֵלָה, דְּאֵין אִסּוּרָהּ מֵחֲמַת עַצְמָהּ רַק מֵחֲמַת דָּם הַבָּלוּעַ בָּהּ (שָׁם וְת"ה סי' ק"ע). כָּל חֲתִיכָה שֶׁלֹּא נֶאֶסְרָה רַק כְּדֵי קְלִפָּה, בְּטֵלָה, דַּהֲרֵי הַקְּלִפָּה אֵינָהּ רְאוּיָה לְהִתְכַּבֵּד. (סְבָרַת הַתּוֹסָפוֹת וּבְהַגָּהוֹת ש"ד).
It does not have the status of "a piece fit to be served to guests" unless its prohibition stems from itself, such as neveilah (carrion/meat not slaughtered according to Jewish law) or meat [cooked] with milk. However, if it became forbidden because it absorbed the flavor of a forbidden substance and there was not sixty [times its volume of permitted food] to nullify it—even according to the opinion that holds "the [forbidden] piece itself becomes neveilah" (חנ"ן)—it does not have the status of "a piece fit to be served to guests." Gloss (Rema): And even a piece [of meat] that was not salted is nullified, for its prohibition does not stem from itself, but rather due to the blood absorbed within it (ibid. and Terumat HaDeshen, Siman 170). Any piece that became forbidden only to the depth of a peelable layer (k'dei klifah) is nullified, for the peelable layer itself is not fit to be served to guests (The opinion of the Tosafot and Hagahot Shaarei Dura).
Se’if 3ג׳
תַּרְנְגֹלֶת בְּנוֹצָתָהּ שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבָה בַּאֲחֵרוֹת, בְּטֵלָה, שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵינָהּ רְאוּיָה לְהִתְכַּבֵּד לִפְנֵי הָאוֹרְחִים כְּמוֹת שֶׁהִיא. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאַחַר שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבָה הֵסִירוּ הַנּוֹצָה. וְכֵן לֹא חֲשִׁיבָה רְאוּיָה לְהִתְכַּבֵּד אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הִיא מְבֻשֶּׁלֶת. וְכֵן כֶּבֶשׂ שָׁלֵם אוֹ חֲתִיכָה גְּדוֹלָה יוֹתֵר מִדַּאי, לֹא חֲשִׁיבָה רְאוּיָה לְהִתְכַּבֵּד, שֶׁאֵין דֶּרֶךְ לִתֵּן לִפְנֵי הָאוֹרֵחַ כֶּבֶשׂ שָׁלֵם אוֹ חֲתִיכָה גְּדוֹלָה יוֹתֵר מִדַּאי. וְיֵשׁ חוֹלְקִים בְּכָל זֶה. הַגָּה: וְכֵן נוֹהֲגִין, מִלְּבַד תַּרְנְגֹלֶת בְּנוֹצָתָהּ דְּמְחֻסֶּרֶת מַעֲשֶׂה גָּדוֹל, דְּנוֹהֲגִים בָּהּ שֶׁהִיא בְּטֵלָה (טוּר בְּשֵׁם י"א וּבְמָרְדֳּכַי וּבְש"ד). וְכֵן רַגְלַיִם אוֹ רֹאשׁ שֶׁלֹּא נֶחְרְכוּ מְשַׁעֲרָן. אֲבָל אִם כְּבָר נֶחְרְכוּ, חֲשִׁיבֵי חֲתִיכָה הָרְאוּיָה לְהִתְכַּבֵּד, אֲפִלּוּ לֹא נִמְלְחוּ עֲדַיִן. וַאֲפִלּוּ כֶּבֶשׂ שָׁלֵם אֵינוֹ בָּטֵל (בהַגָּהוֹת ש"ד). מִיהוּ רַגְלַיִם שֶׁל עוֹפוֹת, מִלְּבַד רַגְלֵי אַוָּז, וְכֵן רַגְלֵי בְּהֵמָה דַּקָּה בִּמְדִינוֹת אֵלּוּ, לֹא חֲשִׁיבֵי כְּלָל, וּבְטֵלִים. רֹאשׁ שֶׁל עוֹפוֹת אֵינוֹ חָשׁוּב, וּבָטֵּל (אָרֹךְ כְּלָל כ"ה).
A chicken in its feathers that became mixed with others is nullified, since it is not fit to be served to guests as it is, even if the feathers were removed after it became mixed. Similarly, it is not considered fit to be served unless it is cooked. Similarly, a whole lamb or an excessively large piece of meat is not considered fit to be served, for it is not customary to serve a guest a whole lamb or an excessively large piece. And there are those who disagree with all this. Gloss (Rema): And this is our custom [to rule stringently like the dissenting view], except for a chicken in its feathers, which lacks a major preparatory action [to make it ready], where our custom is that it is nullified (Tur in the name of 'Some say', and the Mordechai and Sha'arei Dura). And similarly, feet or a head that have not yet had their hair singed off [are nullified]. But if they have already been singed, they are considered a piece fit to be served, even if they have not yet been salted. And even a whole lamb is not nullified (Hagahot Shaarei Dura). However, the feet of birds—except for goose feet—and similarly the feet of small livestock in these countries, are not considered significant at all and are nullified. A bird's head is not considered significant and is nullified (Aruch Klal 25).
Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah — Torat Emet 357 edition, via Sefaria — public domain
English: Sefaria Community Translation — CC0