Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah Siman 102

Siman 102

Presented here for study, not as a practical ruling. The Shulchan Aruch rules by Sephardi custom, the Rema's glosses by Ashkenazi custom, and the Kitzur follows Ashkenazi custom. For a practical question, ask your rabbi.

א כָּל דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מַתִּירִין, כְּגוֹן בֵּיצָה שֶׁנּוֹלְדָה בְּיוֹם טוֹב, שֶׁרְאוּיָה לְמָחָר, אִם נִתְעָרְבָה בַּאֲחֵרוֹת, בֵּין שְׁלֵמָה בֵּין טְרוּפָה, אֵינָהּ בְּטֵלָה אֲפִלּוּ בְּאֶלֶף. וַאֲפִלּוּ סָפֵק אִם נוֹלְדָה בְּיוֹם טוֹב, וְנִתְעָרְבָה בַּאֲחֵרוֹת, אֲסוּרוֹת. וְאִם נִתְעָרְבָה בְּשֶׁאֵינָהּ מִינָהּ, בְּטֵלָה בס'. (טוּר וְש"ד ותשו' הָרֹא"שׁ וְר' יְרוּחָם וְהַגָּהוֹת ש"ד וְרש"ל וְרוֹקֵחַ וְכנ"ד סְמַ"ג וּסְמַ"ק בהל' י"ט וְכֵן כָּתַב או"ה כְּלָל כ"ו בְּשֵׁם סְמַ"ג וְת"ח כְּלָל מ"ג וְלֹא כְּבַ"ח וּסְמַ"ק סִימָן רי"ד וְכֵן מַשְׁמָע בַּאֲגֻדָּה וּמָרְדְּכַי רֵישׁ בֵּיצָה בְּשֵׁם ראבי"ה וְכֵן כָּתַב טא"ח סִימָן תקי"ג וְהָאָגוּר בִּשְׁמוֹ וְהאו"ה כְּלָל כ"ה בְּשֵׁם מָרְדְּכַי רֵישׁ בֵּיצָה בְּשֵׁם ראבי"ה וְלֹא כב"ח). הַגָּה: מִיהוּ אִם לִבְּנוּ בָּהּ מַאֲכָל, אוֹ נָתְנוּ בַּקְּדֵרָה לְתַקֵּן הַקְּדֵרָה, כְּגוֹן שֶׁמִּלְאוּהָ בְּתַרְנְגֹלֶת, אֵינָהּ בְּטֵלָה (הַגָּהַת ש"ד וּבְאָרֹךְ) וְעַיֵּן בא"ח סִימָן תקי"ג.

1 The laws of an item that will become permitted. And it contains 4 sections: Any item that will eventually become permitted, such as an egg laid on a festival which will be fit for consumption the following day: if it becomes mixed with others, whether whole or beaten, it is not nullified, even in a mixture of a thousand to one. Even if there is a doubt as to whether it was laid on the festival, and it became mixed with others, they are forbidden. However, if it became mixed with a different kind of food, it is nullified in a ratio of sixty to one. (Sources cited: Tur, Shaarei Dura, Responsa of the Rosh, Rabbeinu Yeruham, Hagahot Shaarei Dura, Maharshal, Rokeach, and similarly Smag and Smak in the laws of Yom Tov. And so wrote Issur V'Heter principle 26 in the name of Smag, and Torat Chatat principle 43, and not like the Bach; and Smak section 214. And so it is implied in the Agudah and Mordechai at the beginning of tractate Beitza in the name of Raavya. And so wrote Tur Orach Chayim section 513 and Agur in his name, and Issur V'Heter principle 25 in the name of Mordechai at the beginning of Beitza in the name of Raavya, and not like the Bach.) Rema: However, if they used it to glaze or whiten a food, or put it in a pot to enhance the dish, such as stuffing a chicken with it, it is not nullified. (Hagahot Shaarei Dura and in the Arukh). And see Orach Chayim section 513.

ב יֵשׁ מִי שֶׁאוֹמֵר שֶׁלֹּא אָמְרוּ דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מַתִּירִין אֶלָּא כְּשֶׁהַמַּתִּיר עָתִיד לָבוֹא עַל כָּל פָּנִים, אוֹ אִם הַמַּתִּיר בְּיָדוֹ לַעֲשׂוֹתוֹ בְּלֹא הֶפְסֵד, אֲבָל דָּבָר שֶׁאֵינוֹ בְּיָדוֹ, וְאֵינוֹ וַדַּאי שֶׁבָּא הַמַּתִּיר, אֵינוֹ בְּדִין דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מַתִּירִין. לְפִיכָךְ, בֵּיצָה שֶׁל סְפֵק טְרֵפָה שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבָה בַּאֲחֵרוֹת, אֵינוֹ בְּדִין דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מַתִּירִין, לְפִי שֶׁאֵין הַמַּתִּיר בְּוַדַּאי וְאֵינוֹ בְּיָדוֹ.

2 There are those who say that the rule of an item that will become permitted applies only when the permitting factor will come about in any event, or if the permitting factor is in one's power to accomplish without financial loss. But something that is not in one's power, and it is not certain that the permitting factor will come, is not governed by the law of an item that will become permitted. Therefore, an egg about which there is a doubt whether it is from a tereifah, which became mixed with others, is not governed by the law of an item that will become permitted, because the permitting factor is not certain and is not in one's power.

ג כְּלִי שֶׁנֶּאֱסַר בִּבְלִיעַת אִסוּר, שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בַּאֲחֵרִים וְאֵינוֹ נִכָּר, בָּטֵל בְּרֹב וְאֵין דָּנִין אוֹתוֹ כְּדָבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מַתִּירִין לְפִי שֶׁצָּרִיךְ לְהוֹצִיא עָלָיו הוֹצָאוֹת לְהַגְעִילוֹ, וְכָל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה.

3 A vessel that became forbidden through the absorption of a forbidden substance, which became mixed with others and cannot be distinguished, is nullified by a majority. We do not apply the law of an item that will become permitted to it (because one must incur expenses to kasher it with boiling water, and anything similar).

ד יֵשׁ מִי שֶׁאוֹמֵר דְּלֹא שַׁיָּךְ דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מַתִּירִין הֵיכָא שֶׁהַמַּאֲכָל מִתְקַלְקֵל. הַגָּה: הָא דְּדָבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מַתִּירִין אֵינוֹ בָּטֵל, הַיְנוּ דַּוְקָא אִם הָאִסּוּר בְּעַיִן אוֹ שֶׁיֵּשׁ עֲדַיִן מַמָּשׁוּת הָאִסּוּר בַּתַּעֲרֹבֶת, אֲבָל טַעֲמוֹ, בָּטֵל (טוּר א"ח סי' תקי"ג וּבְאָרֹךְ וְהג"א סוֹף עֲבוֹדַת כּוֹכָבִים וּמהרא"י בְּשֵׁם מהרי"ח). וְכֵן אִם אֵין אִסּוּרוֹ מֵחֲמַת עַצְמוֹ, בָּטֵל. וְלָכֵן חֲתִיכָה שֶׁלֹּא נִמְלְחָה תּוֹךְ ג' יָמִים, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיֵּשׁ אוֹמְרִים דְּמִקְרֵי דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מַתִּירִין הוֹאִיל וּמֻתֶּרֶת לְצָלִי, אֲפִלּוּ הָכֵי בְּטֵלָה, דְּאֵין אִסּוּרָהּ אֶלָּא מֵחֲמַת דָּם הַבָּלוּעַ בָּהּ (תּוֹרַת הַבַּיִת סִימָן ק"ע). כָּל אִסּוּר שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה נִכָּר קֹדֶם שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב, הָוֵי בָּטֵל אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מַתִּירִין (בְּאָרֹךְ כְּלָל כ"ה בְּשֵׁם סְמַ"ג וּמָרְדְּכַי פ"ק דְּשַׁבָּת). מִי שֶׁנָּדַר מִדָּבָר אֶחָד וְנִתְעָרֵב אַחַר כָּךְ, לְדִידֵיהּ מִקְרֵי דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מַתִּירִין (שָׁם וּבְמַיְמוֹנִי פ"ח דִּנְדָרִים ובר"ן פ"ק וְאו"ה וְהוּא ש"ס עָרוּךְ פ"ז דִּנְדָרִים דַּף נ"ט וִירוּשַׁלְמִי פ"ו דִּנְדָרִים וּמֻסְכָּם מִכָּל הַפּוֹסְקִים), דְּהָא אֶפְשָׁר לִשְׁאֹל עַל נִדְרוֹ. דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ הֶתֵּר וְחוֹזֵר וְנֶאֱסָר, כְּגוֹן חָמֵץ בְּפֶסַח, לֹא מִקְרֵי דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מַתִּירִין (מָרְדְּכַי פֶּרֶק כ"ש). וְיֵשׁ חוֹלְקִין בְּזֶה. (רַמְבַּ"ם פט"ו מהמ"א) וְלֹא מִקְרֵי דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מַתִּירִין אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הֻתַּר לְמִי שֶׁנֶּאֱסָר, אֲבָל אִם נִשְׁאָר לְאֶחָד לְעוֹלָם אָסוּר, אַף עַל גַּב שֶׁמֻּתָּר לַאֲחֵרִים כְּגוֹן הַמְבַשֵּׁל בְּשַׁבָּת, לֹא מִקְרֵי דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מַתִּירִין (בֵּית יוֹסֵף בְּשֵׁם רַבֵּנוּ יְרוּחָם בְּשֵׁם הַרמ"ה).

4 There are those who say that the rule of an item that will become permitted does not apply where the food will spoil. Rema: That which an item that will become permitted is not nullified is specifically if the forbidden substance is visibly present, or if there is still physical substance of the prohibition in the mixture, but its taste is nullified (Tur Orach Chaim section 513, and in the Arukh, and Hagahot Asheri at the end of Avodah Zarah, and Mahara"i in the name of Mahari"ch). And similarly, if its prohibition is not due to itself, it is nullified. Therefore, a piece [of meat] that was not salted within three days, even though there are those who say it is considered an item that will become permitted since it is permitted for roasting, even so, it is nullified, for it is only forbidden due to the blood absorbed in it (Terumat Hadeshen section 170). Any prohibition that was not distinguishable before it became mixed is nullified, even though it is an item that will become permitted (in the Arukh principle 25 in the name of S"G, and Mordechai first chapter of Shabbat). One who vowed [not to benefit] from a certain thing and it subsequently became mixed, for him it is considered an item that will become permitted (there, and in Maimonides chapter 8 of Nedarim, and in the Ran first chapter, and Issur V'Heter, and it is an explicit Talmud chapter 7 of Nedarim page 59, and Yerushalmi chapter 6 of Nedarim, and agreed upon by all the poskim), for behold, it is possible to request absolution for his vow. An item that has a permitted state and subsequently becomes forbidden, such as chametz on Passover, is not considered an item that will become permitted (Mordechai chapter Kol Sha'ah). And there are those who disagree with this (Maimonides chapter 15 of Ma'akhalot Asurot). And it is not considered an item that will become permitted unless it becomes permitted to the one to whom it was forbidden. But if it remains forever forbidden to one [person], even though it is permitted to others, such as one who cooks on Shabbat, it is not considered an item that will become permitted (Beit Yosef in the name of Rabbeinu Yeruham in the name of the Ramah).

Previous Chapter Next Chapter