יורה דעה ק״טYoreh De'ah 109

Se’if 1א׳

חֲתִיכָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ רְאוּיָה לְהִתְכַּבֵּד, שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבָה בַּאֲחֵרוֹת מִין בְּמִינוֹ יָבֵשׁ בְּיָבֵשׁ, דְּהַיְנוּ שֶׁאֵין נִבְלָל, וְהָאִסּוּר עוֹמֵד בְּעַצְמוֹ אֶלָּא שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב וְאֵינוֹ מַכִּירוֹ (בֵּית יוֹסֵף בְּשֵׁם תְּשׁוּבַת הָרַשְׁבָּ"א וְהָרַמְבַּ"ן וְסה"ת) חַד בִּתְרֵי, בָּטִיל, וּמֻתָּר לְאָכְלָן אָדָם אֶחָד, כָּל אַחַת בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ. אֲבָל לֹא יֹאכַל שְׁלָשְׁתָּם יַחַד. וְיֵשׁ מִי שֶׁאוֹסֵר לְאָכְלָם אָדָם אֶחָד א', אֲפִלּוּ זֶה אַחַר זֶה. הַגָּה: וְכֵן יֵשׁ לִנְהֹג לְכַתְּחִלָּה. וְיֵשׁ מַחְמִירִין לְהַשְׁלִיךְ אֶחָד אוֹ לִתֵּן לְעוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים (הַגָּהוֹת ש"ד בְּשֵׁם מוהר"ם וְרַשִׁ"י בְּע"ז דַּף ע"ד ע"א). וְאֵינוֹ אֶלָּא חֻמְרָא בְּעָלְמָא. וְכָל זֶה כְּשֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בְּמִינוֹ, אֲבָל שֶׁלֹּא בְּמִינוֹ וְאֵין מַכִּירוֹ, אֲפִלּוּ יָבֵשׁ בְּיָבֵשׁ צָרִיךְ שִׁשִּׁים (טוּר בְּשֵׁם בַּעַל הַתְּרוּמָה וְעוֹד הַרְבֵּה פּוֹסְקִים). וְאֵין חִלּוּק בְּכָל זֶה בֵּין אִם הָאִסּוּר מִדְּרַבָּנָן אוֹ מִדְּאוֹרַיְתָא (בֵּית יוֹסֵף בְּשֵׁם הַפּוֹסְקִים דְּלֹא כְּהַגָּהַת ש"ד). וְע"ל סִימָן קכ"ב אִם נִתְעָרְבוּ כֵּלִים בְּיַחַד.

A piece that is not fit to be set before guests with honour, that became mixed with others, a kind with its own kind, dry with dry — that is, where it is not blended, and the forbidden thing stands by itself, save that it became mixed and he does not recognise it (Beit Yosef in the name of a responsum of the Rashba, and the Ramban, and Sefer haTerumah) — one in two: it is nullified, and it is permitted for one man to eat them, each one by itself. But he shall not eat the three of them together. And there is one who forbids one man to eat them, even one after another. Hagah [Rema]: And so one should act at the outset. And there are those who are stringent, to throw one away or to give it to an idolater (oved kokhavim — the standing term for a gentile) (Hagahot Shaarei Dura in the name of Maharam, and Rashi in Avodah Zarah, folio 74a). And it is only a mere stringency. And all this is where it became mixed with its own kind; but where it is not with its own kind and he does not recognise it, even dry with dry sixty is required (Tur in the name of Ba'al haTerumah and many other poskim). And there is no distinction in all this between whether the prohibition is from the Rabbis or from the Torah (Beit Yosef in the name of the poskim, not in accordance with the Hagahat Shaarei Dura). And see below, siman 122, as to whether vessels became mixed together.

Se’if 2ב׳

יָבֵשׁ בְּיָבֵשׁ שֶׁנִּתְבַּטֵּל חַד בִּתְרֵי, אִם בִּשְּׁלָן כֻּלָּן כְּאֶחָד, וַאֲפִלּוּ לֶאֱכֹל כָּל אֶחָד בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ אָסוּר, אִם אֵין שָׁם שִׁשִּׁים, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהָרֹטֶב בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם וְנִבְלָע בַּחֲתִיכוֹת. וְאִם רוֹצֶה לְבַשְּׁלָן יַחַד וְאֵין שָׁם ס', מֻתָּר לְהַרְבּוֹת עֲלֵיהֶם כְּדֵי שִׁעוּר שִׁשִּׁים וּלְבַשְּׁלָן, וְאֵין בּוֹ מִשּׁוּם מְבַטֵּל אִסוּר. הַגָּה: וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים דְּאִם נוֹדַע הַתַּעֲרוֹבוֹת קֹדֶם שֶׁנִּתְבַּשְּׁלוּ בְּיַחַד, הַכֹּל שָׁרֵי, דְּאֵין חוֹזְרִין וְנֶאֱסָרִין מֵאַחַר שֶׁנִּתְבַּטֵּל בְּיָבֵשׁ (טוּר בְּשֵׁם הָרֹא"שׁ וְרַבֵּנוּ יְרוּחָם בְּשֵׁם הַתּוֹסָפוֹת וְכָתַב שֶׁכֵּן עִקָר). וּבִמְקוֹם הֶפְסֵד יֵשׁ לִסְמֹךְ אַדִּבְרֵי הַמְּקִלִּין וּלְהַתִּיר.

Dry with dry that was nullified one in two: if he cooked them all as one, it is forbidden even to eat each one by itself, if there is not sixty there, because the gravy imparts taste and is absorbed in the pieces. And if he wishes to cook them together and there is not sixty there, it is permitted to add to them the measure of sixty and to cook them, and there is in it nothing of nullifying a prohibition. Hagah [Rema]: And there are those who say that if the mixture became known before they were cooked together, the whole is permitted, for they do not go back and become forbidden once it has been nullified while dry (Tur in the name of the Rosh, and Rabbeinu Yerucham in the name of the Tosafot, and he wrote that so is the main ruling). And in a case of loss there is ground to rely upon the words of those who are lenient, and to permit.