✦ ❖ ✦
DAAT · LEVEL 4 — HALAKHA LE-MA'ASSE / PSAK

שולחן ערוך · יורה דעה

Siman 100 — A Beriah (Whole Creature) Is Never Nullified — Practical psika
סימן ק׳ · הלכה למעשה
בְּרִיָּה אֲפִלּוּ בְּאֶלֶף לֹא בְּטֵלָה
פסק המחבר והרמ״א · הכרעת נושאי הכלים · פסיקת הספרדים והאשכנזים בזמננו
⚖️ פסק הלכה ולמעשה ⚖️
✦ ❖ ✦

Halakha le-ma'asse — the practical psika

The בריה — a whole creature/unit (ant, impure bird, gid hanasheh, ever min hachai, egg with a chick)
is never nullified, even in a thousand (אפילו באלף); the three conditions, the gid and its fat, and worms

Subject:
שולחן ערוך יורה דעה סימן ק׳ (ד' סעיפים)
עם נושאי הכלים: ש״ך, ט״ז, פרי מגדים, פתחי תשובה

⚠ Level disclaimer:
This level is not "Da'at HaRav": the Shulchan Aruch HaRav
(the Admur HaZaken) does not cover Yoreh De'ah, hence not Siman 100.
It is a level of practical psika: what one does, and whom to ask.

Writing and iyun:
הרב יוסף חיים סממה · DAAT

How to read this level. Every statement is anchored either in the text of the Shulchan Aruch and its nossei kelim (Shach, Taz, Pri Megadim, Pitchei Teshuva), or in a named responsum of the contemporary poskim. On Yoreh De'ah there is neither a Mishnah Berurah (which comments only on Orach Chaim), nor a Shulchan Aruch HaRav / Da'at HaRav (the Admur HaZaken did not write the YD). Every concrete application (le-ma'asse) concludes with the referral to your Rav: identifying a beriah, knowing whether an ant has "emerged," whether an ever makes up a kazayit, whether vegetables were checked, are factual questions that only a posek who sees your situation can decide.

📑 תוכן העניינים

  1. שורש הסימן — חשיבות הבריה: דרבנן או דאורייתא (סעיף א')
  2. פסק המחבר והרמ״א — מסגרת ההלכה בד' סעיפים
  3. שלושת התנאים — חיות / אסור מתחילת ברייתו / שלם (סעיף א')
  4. ספק בריה — ספק דרבנן לקולא, והנפקא מינה
  5. בריה שנתבשלה — מכירה / אינו מכירה (סעיף ב')
  6. גיד הנשה — בריה, אך אין בו בנותן טעם ; ושמנו (סעיף ב')
  7. בריה שנאבדה ברוטב — הכל אסור (סעיף ג')
  8. תולעים — ג׳ פעמים — מי השלקות והבשר (סעיף ד')
  9. פסיקת הספרדים בזמננו — Yabia Omer, Yalkut Yossef, Or LeTzion
  10. פסיקת האשכנזים — Aruch HaShulchan and the acharonim
  11. מקרים מודרניים — Insects in flour, infestable produce, ever min hachai
  12. סיכום מעשי וטבלאות — ולמעשה, שאל את רבך

📜 The text of the Shulchan Aruch — Seif Alef

בְּרִיָּה — דְּהַיְינוּ כְּגוֹן נְמָלָה אוֹ עוֹף טָמֵא וְגִיד הַנָּשֶׁה וְאֵבֶר מִן הַחַי וּבֵיצָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ אֶפְרוֹחַ וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶם — אֲפִלּוּ בְּאֶלֶף לֹא בְּטֵלָה.

וְאֵין לוֹ דִּין בְּרִיָּה אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הוּא דָּבָר שֶׁהָיָה בּוֹ חִיּוּת, וְשֶׁאָסוּר מִתְּחִלַּת בְּרִיָּתוֹ, וְשֶׁהוּא שָׁלֵם — שֶׁאִם יֵחָלֵק אֵין שְׁמוֹ עָלָיו.

The בריה. A beriah — e.g. an ant (נמלה), an impure bird (עוף טמא), the gid hanasheh (sciatic nerve), an ever min hachai (limb of a living animal), an egg containing a chick and the like — is not nullified even in a thousand (אפילו באלף).

And it has the status of beriah only if it is something that had life (חיות), that is forbidden from the very start of its formation, and that is whole — such that, divided, its name no longer applies.

— Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 100:1 · talmudic basis: the sugya of Chullin 99b–100a (בריה; חתיכה הראויה להתכבד) · Sefaria YD 100:1

1. שורש הסימן — the chashivut of the beriah, and its level

The foundation. Siman 100 deals with an exception to the general rule of nullification: ordinarily a forbidden item is nullified in a majority (or in 60); but a בריה — a complete and therefore important (חשובה) entity — is never nullified, even in a thousand. It is one of three categories of important item (with ראוי להתכבד and דבר שבמנין of siman 101) where chashivut blocks nullification. The whole siman turns on one question of principle and one of practice: what deserves the title of beriah, and what one does in case of doubt.
Derabbanan or de'oraita? (Taz s.k. 1). The Taz lays down the foundation that is decisive for practice: the fact that the beriah is not nullified is rabbinic (דרבנן). By Torah law, it would be nullified like any forbidden item (and one would be liable even for less than a kazayit, since "לא תאכל אותם" is written without a measure, min be-mino); it is the Sages who were stringent on the mixture because of its chashivut. This qualification drives the central נפקא מינה of the siman: in case of doubt (is it a beriah?), we have a safek derabbanan → le-kula — the item is nullified.

Why chashivut blocks nullification

Nullification in a majority (or in 60) rests on the idea that the forbidden item "disappears" into the mass; but an important thing does not disappear in one's mind — it remains "counted." The beriah is the archetype of the davar chashuv: a whole creature has a name, an identity, one "counts" it; one therefore does not say it dissolved into the mixture. It is the same principle that, in siman 101, makes the chatichah ha-re'uyah le-hitkabed not nullified — which is why the Taz treats the two together.

2. פסק המחבר והרמ״א — the map of the siman

Siman 100 has 4 seifim. The Mehaber lays the framework: the definition of the beriah and its three conditions (seif 1), the case of a cooked beriah and the exception of the gid (seif 2), a beriah lost in the broth (seif 3), and worms in vegetables (seif 4). The Rama (הגה) adds only a single gloss, on the measure of the gid. Here is the overall map, as it emerges from the text itself.

SeifTopicPsak (anchored in the text)
1Definition of the beriah + the three conditionsAnt, impure bird, gid hanasheh, ever min hachai, egg with a chick… → אפילו באלף לא בטלה. Beriah status only if: (1) חיות — excludes a grain (חטה); (2) אסור מתחילת ברייתו — excludes a kosher bird that became neveilah, the שור הנסקל; (3) שלם / שאם יחלק אין שמו עליו — excludes חֵלֶב, and it must be whole. Rama: the essence of the gid is the part on the כף, ~4 finger-breadths; whole → beriah.
2A cooked beriah + the gid and its fatBeriah cooked with permitted food: not recognized → all forbidden, broth is נותן טעם; recognized → discard it, the rest + broth → 60 against it. Exception: the gid hanasheh — אין בגידים בנותן טעם, but its fat (שמנו) forbids → 60 against the fat. A thigh (ירך) with its gid: recognized → discard it, permitted if 60 against the fat; not recognized → pieces forbidden, broth permitted if 60 against the fat. Gid that melted (נמוח) → also 60 against it.
3A beriah lost in the brothA pot of broth into which a beriah fell and was lost (נאבדה) → all forbidden: the beriah is not nullified and cannot be removed.
4Worms in vegetablesCooked vegetables in which three worms (ג׳ תולעים) were found: the vegetables are forbidden; but the cooking water (מי השלקות) → one filters it (מסננן) and it is permitted; and the meat → one washes and checks it (ירחצנו ויבדקנו) and it is permitted.
כלל הפסק של הסימן :
מידה אחת חותכת את הסימן — החשיבות : הבריה אפילו באלף לא בטלה. ולמעשה, חשיבות זו דרבנן (ט״ז), ועל כן ספק בריה → ספק דרבנן → בטל. ואין דין בריה אלא בשלושה תנאים — חיות, אסור מתחילת ברייתו, ושלם — וכל ספק באחד מהם מקל. ובתולעים, « ג׳ פעמים » עושה חזקה, אך מי השלקות מסננן והבשר ירחצנו ויבדקנו.

3. שלושת התנאים — the three conditions of the beriah

ואין לו דין בריה אלא אם כן הוא דבר שהיה בו חיות, ושאסור מתחילת ברייתו, ושהוא שלם — שאם יחלק אין שמו עליו.

— שולחן ערוך יו״ד ק׳:א
ConditionWhat it requiresWhat it excludes
1. חיות (had life)The object must have been a living beingA grain (חטה) of a forbidden item (orlah, tevel): it never had life → it is nullified
2. אסור מתחילת ברייתו (forbidden from its formation)The prohibition must attach to it from the startA kosher bird that became neveilah and a שור הנסקל: permitted at origin, forbidden later → nullified
3. שלם (whole)Whole, and such that divided its name disappearsThe חֵלֶב (still called "chelev" even divided); and any beriah already crushed (נתרסקה — cf. סי' ק״א:ו')
"שלם": not only the name, but the reality (Taz s.k. 2). The Taz clarifies that the third condition is not reduced to the criterion "שאם יחלק אין שמו עליו": one needs in addition that the beriah be actually whole. A beriah that has been crushed / ground (נתרסקה) has lost its chashivut and is nullified — the Taz refers to siman 101:6 (the beriah resukah). This is a major practical point: an insect crushed in the milling is no longer a beriah that "is not nullified."
Shach (s.k. 1): the gid hanasheh and the ever min hachai do have beriah status because they had life (חיותא) — Rashba and Ran. The gid, although not a "being" in its own right, is part of a living body and therefore counts as a beriah as to chashivut.
Pitchei Teshuva (s.k. 1): on ants found in fruit / flour — the Krof distinguishes: if the ants have already emerged (from their place of formation), they were not "forbidden from the start of their formation" and are nullified in 60 (condition 2 unmet); the Tur HaEven disputes and holds them to be full beriot. The Mishkenot Yaakov deals with worms in flour in summer. A debate not to be decided alone.

Le-ma'asse (the three conditions). Before saying "a beriah that is not nullified," check the three conditions: did it have life? was it forbidden from origin? is it whole and not crushed? If one is missing (or even in doubt on one), the item is nullified. But these qualifications — an ant emerged or not, an insect ground or whole — are factual questions. For the application to your specific situation, consult your Rav (or a competent Dayan).

4. ספק בריה — doubt, and the central nafka mina

From theory to practice. All the practical weight of the Taz's "derabbanan" is revealed here. Since "a beriah is not nullified" is only a rabbinic decree, as soon as there is a doubt — doubt on the status (is it a beriah?) or doubt on one of the three conditions — one applies safek derabbanan le-kula: the item is nullified (in a majority, or in 60 as the case may be). This is the most frequently used leniency of the siman.
Type of doubtReasoningPractical consequence
Is it really a beriah?chashivut = derabbanan → safek derabbananLe-kula — nullified (Taz s.k. 1)
Did it have חיות / was it forbidden from origin?Doubt on a condition of the beriahLe-kula — no beriah status → nullified
Is it whole or crushed (נתרסקה)?If crushed → no chashivut (101:6)Nullified in 60 / in a majority
A beriah that melted (נמוח)Loses its chashivut, but the Torah forbade itOne requires 60; in doubt → lenient (Taz s.k. 5)
The beriah that melted (Taz s.k. 5). A beriah that has dissolved / liquefied (נמוח) loses its whole form, hence its beriah chashivut — it ought to be nullified. The Taz nevertheless rules that one requires 60 against it (since the Torah had forbidden it), while citing the Torat HaBayit who suggests it might even be nullified in a majority because it never imparts taste; and in case of doubt, one inclines to leniency. This is precisely the pivot of seif 2 regarding the melted gid.

Le-ma'asse (doubt). Retain the practical golden rule of the siman: a certain beriah is never nullified; a doubtful beriah (on status, or on one of the three conditions) → safek derabbanan le-kula, it is nullified. But knowing whether there really is a "doubt," and of what type, depends on the facts. For the application to your specific situation, consult your Rav (or a competent Dayan).

5. בריה שנתבשלה — recognized or not recognized

דבר שהוא בריה שנתבשל עם ההיתר : אם אינו מכירו — הכל אסור, והרוטב אסור בנותן טעם ; ואם מכירו — זורקו, וצריך שיהא בשאר ובמרק ששים כנגדו.

— שולחן ערוך יו״ד ק׳:ב
CaseMeasureNote
Cooked beriah, recognized (מכירו)Discard it; the rest and the broth → 60 against itOnce removed, only its taste (טעם) remains to nullify — 60
Cooked beriah, not recognized (אינו מכירו)All forbidden; the broth is נותן טעםIt can neither be removed nor nullified (it is not nullified)
Why "not recognized → all forbidden." As long as the beriah is identifiable and can be removed, the problem of "non-nullification" is solved by removal, and only its taste remains to be nullified by 60. But if it is lost in the mass (not recognized), it can no longer be removed; and since it is not nullified, its presence forbids everything. This is exactly the bridge to seif 3 (the beriah ne'evdah ba-rotev). The broth itself is forbidden only by the taste it imparted.

Le-ma'asse (cooked, recognized or not). A recognizable and removable beriah → remove it, then 60 against its taste. A lost / unrecognizable beriah → it can no longer be nullified, everything is concerned. Knowing whether it is "recognizable" and "removable" in practice (a whole insect in a clear dish vs ground into a purée) is a factual question. For the application to your specific situation, consult your Rav (or a competent Dayan).

6. גיד הנשה — a beriah, but tasteless; and its fat (שומנו)

חוץ מגיד הנשה — שאין בגידין בנותן טעם, אבל שמנו אוסר, וצריך ששים כנגדו. ירך שנתבשל עם גידו : אם מכיר הגיד — נוטלו, והשאר מותר אם יש ששים כנגד שמנו ; ואם אינו מכירו — כל החתיכות אסורות, ואם יש ששים כנגד שמנו, הרוטב מותר. ואם נמוח הגיד — צריך ששים כנגדו.

— שולחן ערוך יו״ד ק׳:ב

The gid is a beriah — but with two particularities

Ruling (the thigh cooked with its gid). If one recognizes the gid → discard it, and all the rest is permitted provided there is 60 against its fat. If one does not recognize it → all the pieces are forbidden (the gid-beriah is lost among them and is not nullified), but the broth is permitted if there is 60 against the fat in the pot (otherwise forbidden). And if the gid has melted (נמוח) and is no longer recognizable → one requires 60 against it too (Taz s.k. 5: its chashivut has partly dissipated, but one does not nullify it outright).
60 against the fat: attached or not (Taz s.k. 4). The Taz refines the calculation of 60 against the fat: if the fat is attached to a specific piece, one counts 60 within that piece; otherwise, one counts 60 against the whole piece that received the fat — for by chatichah na'asset neveilah (cf. סי' צ״ב) the saturated piece itself becomes "forbidden" and requires 60 against its whole. A calculation detail to confirm with a Rav.

Le-ma'asse (gid and fat). The gid is a beriah (remove it if recognized), but it does not forbid by taste — only its fat requires 60. Hence the nikkur (removal of the gid and its fat) before cooking, which solves the problem at the root. The exact calculation of 60 against the fat (attached or not, melted or not) is a factual question. For the application to your specific situation, consult your Rav (or a competent Dayan).

7. בריה שנאבדה ברוטב — the beriah lost in the broth

קדירה של רוטב שנפלה לתוכה בריה ונאבדה — הכל אסור.

— שולחן ערוך יו״ד ק׳:ג
The most stringent case of the siman. When a beriah falls into a pot of broth and is lost (נאבדה) there — impossible to remove, impossible to nullify — everything is forbidden. It is the conjunction of the two principles: (a) the beriah is not nullified (chashivut); (b) it can no longer be isolated. As long as it remains "counted" within the contents, its non-nullification contaminates the whole. It is the direct continuation of the "אינו מכירו" of seif 2.
Pitchei Teshuva (s.k. 3): a classic application — a flea (פרעוש) that fell into a dish and was lost there renders everything forbidden, because it is a beriah that is not nullified and is now untraceable / infiltrated into the food (Chavot Yair 102). This is the typical practical case: an insect seen falling into the pot, then untraceable.

Le-ma'asse (a lost beriah). An insect (flea, fly, ant) seen falling into a liquid dish and untraceable afterward → one cannot rely on nullification (the beriah is not nullified): the pot is concerned. But if a real doubt remains — was it a beriah, did it actually fall, is it whole — one returns to the lever of safek derabbanan. Deciding this doubt is the posek's affair. For the application to your specific situation, consult your Rav (or a competent Dayan).

8. תולעים — "ג׳ פעמים" and the practical conduct

ירקות מבושלים שנמצאו בהם שלש תולעים — הירקות אסורים, אבל מי השלקות מסננן ומותרין ; וכן הבשר ירחצנו ויבדקנו ומותר.

— שולחן ערוך יו״ד ק׳:ד
"Three" = a chazakah (Taz s.k. 6). The Taz reads "ג׳ תולעים" as three times (ג׳ פעמים): finding worms on three occasions establishes a chazakah that those vegetables are infested (מוחזקים בתולעים), so that one forbids them even where none has (yet) been found. And he insists: it is three times, not two (against the view attributed to Rebbi that a chazakah is established in two). This is the basis of all modern halakhah of bedikat tola'im regarding products "presumed infested."
Link to siman 84 (פ״ד). This seif is the gateway to the entire siman of bedikat tola'im (sources of infestation, products to check, checking methods). The "ג׳ פעמים" rule founds the notion of a product muchzak be-tola'im that structures the contemporary checking lists.

Why the water and the meat are permitted though the vegetables are forbidden

Although the beriah (the worm) is not nullified, the cooking water (מי השלקות) and the meat are not lost: the worms are separable. One filters (מסננן) the water — the worms being caught by the filter, what remains is permitted; and the meat, one washes and checks it (ירחצנו ויבדקנו). The logic: as long as the beriah can be removed, the non-nullification problem disappears (like the "מכירו" of seif 2). Only the vegetables, in which the worms are intertwined, remain forbidden.

Le-ma'asse (worms / תולעים). Finding worms three times in the same product makes it a presumed-infested product (chazakah) to be checked before use; the cooking water is filtered, the meat is washed and checked. But the concrete application (how many worms, in which product, which reliable checking method today) belongs to the lists and conducts of bedikat tola'im (סי' פ״ד). For the application to your specific situation, consult your Rav (or a competent Dayan).

9. פסיקת הספרדים בזמננו — contemporary Sephardic psika

Method note. The responsa that follow (Yabia Omer, Yechaveh Da'at, Yalkut Yossef, Or LeTzion) extend the principles of siman 100 above to modern cases (insects in flour, dried fruit, infestable produce). They do not appear in the siman's corpus; they are cited as recognized streams of psika, to be confirmed with a Rav before any application.

Contemporary Sephardic psika (the school of Rav Ovadia Yossef, Rav Ben-Tzion Abba Shaul) departs exactly from the Mehaber's framework: a beriah is not nullified, but a doubtful beriah → safek derabbanan le-kula (relying on the Taz's "derabbanan"). On insects in flour or fruit, the Sephardic school readily uses the Pitchei Teshuva's debate (Krof) on the "emerged" ant (not forbidden from formation → nullified) and the notion of beriah resukah (crushed → nullified) to permit in cases of doubt or loss, while requiring checking where the infestation is established (chazakah, "ג׳ פעמים").
Concrete caseSephardic orientation (to verify)
A whole insect (beriah) fell into a dish and was lostAll forbidden (seif 3, Chavot Yair) — except real doubt on status or on the fall → safek derabbanan le-kula.
Worms / insects ground in the milling (flour)Crushed / melted → no beriah chashivut → nullified (Taz s.k. 2, 5); but checking required if the product is muchzak.
An "emerged" ant in a fruitDebate Krof / Tur HaEven (PT s.k. 1): per several, nullified in 60 (not forbidden from formation) — to confirm.
Gid hanashehNikkur (removal of the gid and its fat) before cooking; otherwise 60 against the fat.
Anchoring in the siman. All of this flows from the text: the beriah is not nullified (seif 1), but its chashivut is derabbanan (Taz) — hence safek derabbanan le-kula; the three conditions (seif 1) open the leniencies (emerged, crushed); the gid and its fat (seif 2) found the nikkur; the lost beriah (seif 3) and the "ג׳ פעמים" (seif 4) govern insects. The contemporary responsa apply these rules to today's kitchens and products.

10. פסיקת האשכנזים — Ashkenazi psika

Method note. Same remark: these streams extend the Rama and the nossei kelim (Shach, Taz, Pitchei Teshuva, Aruch HaShulchan, Chochmat Adam); they are cited as psika landmarks, to be confirmed with a Rav.

Ashkenazi psika departs from the Rama and the acharonim (Chochmat Adam, Aruch HaShulchan YD). Two traits dominate their reading of this siman: (1) the chashivut = derabbanan of the Taz, which opens safek derabbanan le-kula for the many practical doubts about insects; (2) the rigor of bedikat tola'im ("ג׳ פעמים" → chazakah, seif 4), applied meticulously to products muchzakim be-tola'im (leafy vegetables, flour, dried fruit, legumes).
Concrete caseAshkenazi orientation (to verify)
A doubtful beriahSafek derabbanan le-kula (chashivut = derabbanan, Taz s.k. 1); but one does not create doubt where infestation is established.
Beriah resukah / nimoachCrushed or melted → loses chashivut → nullified (60 / majority), Taz s.k. 2 and 5.
Bedikat tola'imStrict checking of muchzakim products ("ג׳ פעמים" → chazakah, seif 4; cf. סי' פ״ד).
Ever min hachai < kazayitPnei Aryeh (PT s.k. 2): less than a kazayit → nullified like yavesh be-yavesh; Pri Megadim disputes — to confirm.
Chabad — only through real sources. The Shulchan Aruch HaRav does not cover Yoreh De'ah; there is therefore no "Da'at HaRav" on siman 100. For Chabad practice on these questions (beriah, bedikat tola'im), one refers to the responsa of the Tzemach Tzedek and to the Sefer HaMinhagim Chabad when they explicitly address a point — and one refrains from attributing to the Admur HaZaken a psak he did not write here.

11. מקרים מודרניים — today's kitchen

How siman 100 illuminates the kitchen. Four tools of the siman serve to decide modern cases: (1) the beriah is not nullified — but its chashivut is derabbanan, hence safek derabbanan le-kula (seif 1); (2) the three conditions, which open the leniencies (emerged, crushed, melted); (3) the beriah lost in the broth → all forbidden (seif 3); (4) bedikat tola'im and the "ג׳ פעמים" (seif 4).
Modern caseTool of the simanOrientation (to confirm with the Rav)
A whole ant found in a cooked dish, still identifiableSeif 2 (מכירו)Remove it; the rest → 60 against its taste. Recognizable and removable → the dish is salvageable.
An insect seen falling into the soup, then untraceableSeif 3 (נאבדה; PT s.k. 3)Lost beriah → all concerned, except a real doubt (was it a beriah, did it fall) → safek derabbanan le-kula.
Worms / weevils ground into the flourSeif 1 (שלם); Taz s.k. 2Ground (נתרסקה) → no chashivut → nullified; but checking if the flour is muchzak (סי' פ״ד).
Leafy vegetables / fresh infestable produceSeif 4 ("ג׳ פעמים")Product muchzak be-tola'im → mandatory checking; cooking water → filter; food → wash and check.
Non-nikkered meat (with its gid hanasheh)Seif 2 (gid / שמנו)Prior nikkur; otherwise gid recognized → remove it (60 against the fat), not recognized → pieces forbidden.

Le-ma'asse. These situations blend factual questions — is the beriah whole or crushed, recognizable or lost, is the product muchzak be-tola'im, has the meat been nikkered — that only your Rav can decide upon seeing the case. The practical rule: precisely reconstruct what fell, into what, whole or not, and whether it can be removed, then ask. For the application to your specific situation, consult your Rav (or a competent Dayan).

12. סיכום מעשי — summary and tables

טבלה — the beriah, in practice

CaseMeasure (for us)Note
A certain beriah (whole, had life, forbidden from origin)אפילו באלף לא בטלה — not nullifiedchashivut (seif 1)
A doubtful beriah (status or condition uncertain)Safek derabbanan le-kula — nullifiedchashivut = derabbanan (Taz s.k. 1)
A crushed (נתרסקה) or melted (נמוח) beriahLoses chashivut → nullified (but 60 if melted, Taz)seif 1 / 101:6; Taz s.k. 2, 5
A cooked beriah, recognizedRemove it; 60 against its tasteseif 2 (מכירו)
A cooked beriah, not recognized / lostAll forbiddenseif 2–3 (אינו מכירו / נאבדה)
Gid hanashehBeriah (remove it); no taste, but 60 against שמנוseif 2; Shach s.k. 1
Worms found 3 times (chazakah)Presumed-infested product → checking; filtered water, washed-checked meat permittedseif 4; Taz s.k. 6; cf. סי' פ״ד

טבלה — who says what (the siman's nossei kelim)

PosekDecisive contribution (anchored in the corpus)
Mehaber (seifim 1-4)Definition of the beriah and its three conditions; cooked beriah (מכירו / אינו מכירו) and the exception of the gid / fat; beriah lost → all forbidden; ג׳ תולעים → vegetables forbidden, filtered water and washed meat permitted.
Rama (הגה)seif 1: the essence of the gid hanasheh is the part on the כף, ~4 finger-breadths; whole → beriah.
Shach (Siftei Kohen)s.k. 1: gid hanasheh and ever min hachai are beriot because they had life (חיותא) — Rashba, Ran.
Taz (Turei Zahav)s.k. 1: the beriah's chashivut is derabbanan (by Torah law it is nullified) — nafka mina: a doubtful beriah → le-kula; s.k. 2: "שלם" actually, נתרסקה → 101:6; s.k. 3: ~4 finger-breadths (ox) / ~2 (lamb); s.k. 4: 60 against the fat, attached or not (chnan, צ״ב); s.k. 5: melted gid, 60 required but lenient in doubt; s.k. 6: "ג׳ תולעים" = three times, chazakah in three (not two).
Pri Megadim (פר״מ)Disputes the Pnei Aryeh on ever min hachai < kazayit (cited in PT s.k. 2) — to be aware of, not to decide alone.
Pitchei Teshuva (פתחי תשובה)s.k. 1: ants in fruit/flour — Krof (emerged → nullified) vs Tur HaEven (beriah); Mishkenot Yaakov on worms in flour in summer. s.k. 2: ever min hachai not nullified only if there is a kazayit; less → nullified like yavesh be-yavesh (Pnei Aryeh), Pri Megadim disputes. s.k. 3: a flea lost in the dish → forbidden (Chavot Yair 102).

טבלה — contemporary psika streams (outside the corpus, to verify)

Sephardic: the school of Rav Ovadia Yossef (Yabia Omer, Yechaveh Da'at), Yalkut Yossef; Or LeTzion (Rav Ben-Tzion Abba Shaul). Extend the Mehaber: a certain beriah is not nullified, but a doubtful beriah → safek derabbanan le-kula; use of the leniencies (emerged ant, beriah resukah) in doubt / loss, with checking where infestation is established.
Ashkenazi: Chochmat Adam, Aruch HaShulchan YD and acharonim. Extend the Rama and the Taz: chashivut = derabbanan (safek derabbanan le-kula), rigor of bedikat tola'im on muchzakim products ("ג׳ פעמים").
Chabad: no Shulchan Aruch HaRav on the YD. One cites only real sources — responsa of the Tzemach Tzedek, Sefer HaMinhagim — when they explicitly address the point.

Sefaria links (text and nossei kelim)

Shulchan Aruch YD 100: 100:1 · 100:2 · 100:3 · 100:4
Shach (Siftei Kohen): 100 s.k. 1
Taz (Turei Zahav): 100 s.k. 1 · 100 s.k. 6
Pitchei Teshuva: 100 s.k. 1 · 100 s.k. 3

👈 הלכה למעשה — the golden rule of this level

  1. In substance, retain the single measure of the siman — chashivut: a beriah is never nullified, אפילו באלף.
  2. In practice, this non-nullification is derabbanan (Taz): hence the golden rule — a doubtful beriah → safek derabbanan → nullified; and always check the three conditions (חיות / forbidden from origin / whole).
  3. The gid hanasheh is a beriah one removes, but it does not forbid by taste — only its fat requires 60; and for worms, "ג׳ פעמים" makes a chazakah, the water is filtered and the meat is washed-and-checked.
  4. And for any real case — whole or crushed, recognizable or lost, infestable product — halakha le-ma'asse goes through your Rav. For the application to your specific situation, consult your Rav (or a competent Dayan).

← Level 3 — Synthesis ↑ Siman ק׳ — contents
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
DAAT · הרב יוסף חיים סממה
תלמיד חכם · מעביר שיעורים בהלכה ובחסידות
פסק והלכה למעשה בדין בריה שאינה בטלה · סימן ק׳ · ⚖️ Level 4 — Halakha le-ma'asse
⚠️ This content is for study purposes. The contemporary streams of psika cited (Sephardic and Ashkenazi) are landmarks, not a personal psak. For any practical application (לְמַעֲשֶׂה), consult a qualified Rav.

DAAT דעת — © 5786 / 2026 · Back to home · Siman ק׳ · ♥ Support

📖Join the khavruta