יורה דעה קל״דYoreh De'ah 134

Se’if 1א׳

יַיִן שֶׁנִּתְנַסֵךְ לַעֲבוֹדַת כּוֹכָבִים שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בְּיַיִן שֶׁל הֶתֵּר, אוֹסֵר בַּהֲנָאָה בְּכָל שֶׁהוּא. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים, כְּשֶׁהוּרַק הַיַּיִן הַמֻּתָּר עַל טִפָּה שֶׁל יַיִן נֶסֶךְ, אֲבָל אִם עֵרָה יַיִן נֶסֶךְ מִצַּרְצוּר קָטָן (פי' פַּךְ קָטָן) לְתוֹךְ הַבּוֹר שֶׁל יַיִן, אֲפִלּוּ עֵרָה כָּל הַיּוֹם כֻּלּוֹ, רִאשׁוֹן רִאשׁוֹן בָּטֵל. עֵרָה מֵהֶחָבִית, בֵּין שֶׁעֵרָה מֵהַמֻּתָּר לָאִסוּר אוֹ מֵהָאִסוּר לַמֻּתָּר, הַכֹּל אָסוּר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהָעַמּוּד הַיּוֹרֵד מִפִּי הֶחָבִית גָּדוֹל.

Wine that was poured out as a libation to idolatry, which became mixed with permitted wine, renders it forbidden in benefit in any amount at all. In what case is this said? Where the permitted wine was poured out upon a drop of yayin nesach (wine poured out as an idolatrous libation). But if he poured yayin nesach from a small pitcher (that is, a small flask) into the pit of wine, even if he poured the whole day long, each drop as it falls is nullified. If he poured from the barrel — whether he poured from the permitted into the forbidden or from the forbidden into the permitted — the whole is forbidden, because the column that descends from the mouth of the barrel is large.

Se’if 2ב׳

יַיִן שֶׁאֵינוֹ אָסוּר אֶלָּא בִּשְׁתִיָּה, אֵינוֹ אוֹסֵר אֶלָּא בְּשִׁשִּׁים. נִתְעָרֵב סְתָם יֵינָם בְּיַיִן מֻתָּר, הֲרֵי זֶה אוֹסֵר בְּכָל שֶׁהוּא בִּשְׁתִיָּה, וְיִמְכֹּר כֻּלּוֹ לְעוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים, וְלוֹקֵחַ דְּמֵי הַיַּיִן הָאָסוּר שֶׁבּוֹ וּמַשְׁלִיכוֹ לְיַם הַמֶּלַח, וְיֵהָנֶה בִּשְׁאָר הַמָּעוֹת. וְכֵן אִם נִתְעָרְבָה חָבִית שֶׁל יַיִן נֶסֶךְ בֵּין הֶחָבִיּוֹת, הַכֹּל אֲסוּרִים בִּשְׁתִיָּה וּמֻתָּרִים בַּהֲנָאָה, וְיוֹלִיךְ דְּמֵי אוֹתָהּ חָבִית לְיַם הַמֶּלַח כְּשֶׁיִּמְכֹּר הַכֹּל לְעוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים. וְכֵן בְּחָבִיּוֹת שֶׁל סְתָם יֵינָם. הַגָּה: הָא דְּחָבִית שֶׁל יַיִן נֶסֶךְ אוֹסֵר כָּל הֶחָבִיּוֹת שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבָה בָּהֶן, הַיְנוּ דַּוְקָא בְּחָבִיּוֹת גְּדוֹלוֹת שֶׁחֲשׁוּבוֹת וְאֵינָן בְּטֵלוֹת, אֲבָל אִם הֵם קְטַנִּים וְאֵינָם חֲשׁוּבִים, חַד בִּתְרֵי בָּטִיל, כְּמוֹ בִּשְׁאָר אִסּוּרִים (תא"ו נ' י"ז). וַאֲפִלּוּ בִּגְדוֹלוֹת, אִם נָפַל אֶחָד מִן הַתַּעֲרֹבֶת לַיָּם אוֹ נִשְׂרַף, הָאֲחֵרִים כֻּלָּם מֻתָּרִים כְּמוֹ בִּשְׁאָר אִסּוּרִים. (ג"ז שָׁם) וְע"ל סִימָן ק"י. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים דְּכָל סְתָם יֵינָם בַּזְּמַן הַזֶּה בָּטֵל בְּשִׁשִּׁים, (תְּשׁוּבַת הָרֹא"שׁ כְּלָל כ"ט וּמָרְדְּכַי פֶּרֶק הַשּׂוֹכֵר וּבְאָרֹךְ כְּלָל ט"ז דִּין י"ד וְר"ש סוֹף תְּרוּמוֹת וְעוֹד פּוֹסְקִים), וְכֵן נוֹהֲגִין לְהָקֵל. וּבְמָקוֹם דְּנִתְעָרֵב עַל יְדֵי נִצּוֹק חִבּוּר כְּדִלְעֵיל סִימָן קכ"ו, אֵין הַיַּיִן הָעֶלְיוֹן מוֹעִיל לַיַּיִן הַתַּחְתּוֹן לְבַטֵּל הָאִסּוּר (בֵּית יוֹסֵף).

Wine that is forbidden only for drinking does not render forbidden save where there is not sixty against it. If setam yeinam (the ordinary wine of idolaters) became mixed with permitted wine, this renders it forbidden in any amount at all for drinking; and he shall sell the whole of it to an idolater (oved kokhavim — the standing term for a gentile), and take the value of the forbidden wine that is in it and cast it into the Dead Sea, and derive benefit from the rest of the money. And likewise if a barrel of yayin nesach became mixed among the barrels, all of them are forbidden for drinking and permitted in benefit, and he shall carry the value of that barrel to the Dead Sea when he sells the whole to an idolater. And so too with barrels of setam yeinam. Hagah [Rema]: This, that a barrel of yayin nesach renders forbidden all the barrels among which it became mixed, is specifically with large barrels, which are of importance and are not nullified; but if they are small and are not of importance, one in two is nullified, as with the rest of the prohibitions (Toldot Adam veChavah, netiv 17). And even with large ones, if one of the mixture fell into the sea or was burnt, all the others are permitted, as with the rest of the prohibitions. (this too there) And see above, siman 110. And there are those who say that all setam yeinam in this time is nullified in sixty (a responsum of the Rosh, kelal 29, and Mordechai, chapter "One who hires", and Issur v'Heter haAroch, kelal 16, law 14, and the Rash at the end of Terumot, and other poskim), and so they are accustomed to be lenient. And in a place where it became mixed by way of nitzok (the unbroken stream of poured wine, which joins what is above to what is below) being a connection, as above in siman 126, the upper wine does not avail the lower wine to nullify the prohibition (Beit Yosef).

Se’if 3ג׳

מַיִם שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבוּ בְּיַיִן, אוֹ יַיִן בְּמַיִם, בְּנוֹתֵן טַעַם; מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵם מִין בְּשֶׁאֵינוֹ מִינוֹ. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים, שֶׁנָּפַל הַמַּשְׁקֶה הַמֻּתָּר לְתוֹךְ הַמַּשְׁקֶה הָאָסוּר. אֲבָל אִם נָפַל הַמַּשְׁקֶה הָאָסוּר לְתוֹךְ הַמַּשְׁקֶה הַמֻּתָּר, רִאשׁוֹן רִאשׁוֹן בָּטֵל. וְהוּא שֶׁיִּזָּרֵק מִצַּרְצוּר קָטָן שֶׁהָיָה מֵרִיק וְיוֹרֵד מְעַט מְעַט. וְאִם נִתְרַבָּה הַמַּשְׁקֶה הָאָסוּר עַד שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ כְּדֵי לִתֵּן טַעַם, אוֹסֵר. וְהֵיאַךְ יִהְיוּ הַמַּיִם אֲסוּרִים, כְּגוֹן שֶׁהָיוּ נֶעֱבָדִים אוֹ תִּקְרֹבֶת לֶאֱלִילִים. הַגָּה: דְּבָרָיו בְּכָאן סוֹתְרִים זֶה אֶת זֶה דְּכָתַב דְּאִם נָפַל הַמַּשְׁקֶה הָאָסוּר לַהֶתֵּר רִאשׁוֹן רִאשׁוֹן בָּטֵל, וְאַחַר כָּךְ כָּתַב דְּאִם נִתְרַבָּה הָאָסוּר חוֹזֵר וְאוֹסֵר, וְהוּא מַחֲלֹקֶת בֵּין הַפּוֹסְקִים. וּלְעִנְיַן דִּינָא סְבָרָא אַחֲרוֹנָה הִיא עִקָּר.

Water that became mixed with wine, or wine with water, goes by imparting taste, because they are a kind with what is not its own kind. In what case is this said? Where the permitted liquid fell into the forbidden liquid. But if the forbidden liquid fell into the permitted liquid, each drop as it falls is nullified — and that is where it is thrown from a small pitcher that was emptying and coming down little by little. And if the forbidden liquid increased until there is in it enough to impart taste, it renders forbidden. And how should the water be forbidden? Such as where it was itself worshipped, or an offering to idols. Hagah [Rema]: His words here contradict one another, for he wrote that if the forbidden liquid fell into the permitted, each drop as it falls is nullified, and afterwards he wrote that if the forbidden increased it goes back and renders forbidden; and it is a dispute among the poskim. And as to the ruling in practice, the latter view is the principal one.