✦ ❖ ✦

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

שולחן ערוך · יורה דעה

Siman 104 — A Mouse Found in Wine or Beer (Akhbar), and Repulsive Creatures — Practical psika

סימן ק״ד · הלכה למעשה

דִּין עַכְבָּר שֶׁנִּמְצָא בְּיַיִן אוֹ בְּשֵׁכָר

פסק המחבר והרמ״א · הכרעת נושאי הכלים · פסיקת הספרדים והאשכנזים בזמננו

⚖️ פסק הלכה ולמעשה ⚖️

✦ ❖ ✦

Halakha le-ma'asse — the practical psika

From the ruling of the Mehaber and the Rama, to the arbitration of the Shach, the Taz, the Pri Megadim
and the Pitchei Teshuva, all the way to the contemporary Sephardic and Ashkenazi poskim

Subject:
שולחן ערוך יורה דעה סימן ק״ד (ג' 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 104.
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: real cases blend factual details (exact temperature, soaking time, liquid or thick dish, species of the creature, significant loss or not) that only a posek who sees your situation can decide.

📑 תוכן העניינים

שורש הסימן — נ״ט לשבח / לפגם, וכבוש כמבושל (סעיף א')
פסק המחבר והרמ״א — מסגרת ההלכה בג' סעיפים
עכברא דדברא ועכברא דמתא — משביח או פוגם (סעיף א')
כבוש כמבושל מעת לעת — צונן ורותח (סעיף א')
נחתך שאי אפשר לבררו — הכרעת הט״ז והש״ך (סעיף א')
יין, שמן ושומן — נ״ט לפגם, והקריבהו נא לפחתך (סעיף ב')
נטילת מקום וספק ספיקא — בשומן (סעיף ב')
דברים המאוסים — נמלים, זבובים, יתושים (סעיף ג')
פסיקת הספרדים בזמננו — Yabia Omer, Yalkut Yossef, Or LeTzion
פסיקת האשכנזים — acharonim and conduct
מקרים מודרניים — Insect in a bottle, gnat in the pot
סיכום מעשי וטבלאות — ולמעשה, שאל את רבך

📜 The text of the Shulchan Aruch — Seif Alef

עַכְבָּרָא דְּדַבְרָא נוֹתֵן טַעַם לְשֶׁבַח הוּא, שֶׁהֲרֵי עוֹלֶה עַל שֻׁלְחַן מְלָכִים. אֲבָל עַכְבָּרָא דְּמָתָא מְסֻפָּק לָנוּ אִם מַשְׁבִּיחַ בְּשֵׁכָר וְחֹמֶץ אוֹ אִם הוּא פּוֹגֵם.

וּלְפִיכָךְ אִם נָפַל לְשֵׁכָר אוֹ לְחֹמֶץ בְּצוֹנֵן וְהֱסִירוֹ שָׁלֵם, אִם לֹא שָׁהָה בְּתוֹכוֹ מֵעֵת לְעֵת — מֻתָּר.

נ״ט לשבח / לפגם. The field mouse (עכברא דדברא) improves the taste (נ״ט לשבח), for it "rises to the table of kings" [a choice dish → it forbids]. But the town mouse (עכברא דמתא) is for us a doubt: does it improve the beer and the vinegar, or does it spoil them?

Therefore: fallen into beer or vinegar cold (בצונן) and removed whole, if it did not remain twenty-four hours (מעת לעת) → permitted.

— Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 104:1 · talmudic basis: the sugya of Chullin (עכברא, נ"ט לשבח) and כבוש כמבושל · Sefaria YD 104:1

1. שורש הסימן — נ״ט לשבח / לפגם, and כבוש כמבושל

The foundation. Siman 104 directly extends Siman 103 (the taste that improves — נ"ט לשבח — or spoils — נ"ט לפגם). It applies it to a concrete case: a mouse (עכבר) or a creature fallen into a liquid. The whole siman turns on three axes: (1) does the mouse improve or spoil? (2) does cold soaking (כבוש) act like cooking? (3) when the prohibition remains without being separable, what becomes of nullification?

Two statuses of mouse (Shach s.k. 1). The Shach refines the Mehaber's distinction: the field mouse (עכברא דדברא) certainly improves beer and vinegar — "it rises to the table of kings" — hence נ"ט לשבח, and it forbids like anything that enhances. The town mouse (עכברא דמתא) remains a doubt: the gemara itself hesitated (improves or spoils?). The Shach notes that the Rishonim speak of "עכבר" stam (without specifying).

כבוש כמבושל — soaking counts as cooking

The structuring principle of seif 1: a cold soaking of 24 hours (מעת לעת) acts like cooking — it makes taste exude and be absorbed (link to siman 105). Under 24 hours cold, with the mouse removed whole → permitted (nothing had time to pass, and it is a doubt). But if it was hot (רותח), or cold but 24 hours elapsed, or if it broke up / dissolved → one needs 60 (ששים) of permitted against the mouse.

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

Siman 104 contains 3 seifim. The Mehaber lays the framework (the mouse, the soaking, the impossible filtering, the wine/oil, the repulsive things); the Rama (הגה) glosses on two decisive points: the limitation of the "all forbidden" to the שרץ alone (seif 1), and the fat (seif 2). Here is the overall map, as it emerges from the text itself.

Seif	Subject	Psak (anchored in the text)
1	עכברא דדברא / דמתא; כבוש; the impossible filtering	Field mouse → נ"ט לשבח, forbids. Town mouse → doubt. Cold, removed whole, < 24 h → permitted. Hot, or 24 h, or broken up/dissolved but filterable/without substance → permitted by 60. Broken into particles impossible to filter (wine/vinegar in a thick dish) → all forbidden, for we fear swallowing the substance. Rama: this fear applies only to a שרץ; for other prohibitions, no concern (או"ה kelal 32).
2	יין, שמן, שומן (נ"ט לפגם)	Fallen into wine, oil (and honey) → it spoils for sure (פוגם בודאי), no need for 60. Rama: likewise for fat (שומן); but some are stringent — if one poured boiling fat with doubt that the mouse was there → all forbidden even with 60. Hard fat before us (or mouse on it) → נטילת מקום (remove the spot), permitted by ספק ספיקא (כבוש כמבושל). Repulsive fat → forbidden to kindle it in the synagogue (הקריבהו נא לפחתך, ref. OH 124). In great loss → one may rely on the lenient.
3	דברים המאוסים	Repulsive things (ants, flies, gnats) from which one recoils → even dissolved in a dish, if the permitted is the majority (ברוב) → permitted. Nonetheless, whatever can be checked and filtered through a strainer, one checks and filters. [But in vinegar and beer, vigilance as for the mouse — ב"י in the name of the Rashba.]

כלל הפסק של הסימן :
שלושה צירים — נ״ט לשבח / לפגם (עכברא דדברא מול דמתא), כבוש כמבושל מעת לעת, ויסוד אחד החותך את הסימן: נחתך שאי אפשר לבררו — אין ביטול, שמא יפגע בעין האיסור. ובדברים המאוסים — בטלים ברוב אף נמחה גופן, ואין משנים את המנהג להקל.

3. עכברא דדברא ועכברא דמתא — improves or spoils?

עכברא דדברא נותן טעם לשבח הוא, שהרי עולה על שולחן מלכים. אבל עכברא דמתא מסופק לנו אם משביח בשכר וחומץ או אם הוא פוגם.

— שולחן ערוך יו״ד ק״ד:א

The Mehaber and the Shach. For the Mehaber, the field mouse is a royal dish: it certainly improves beer and vinegar (נ"ט לשבח) and forbids. The town mouse remains a doubt. The Shach (s.k. 1) stresses that the gemara shows that even what "rises to the table of kings" is still discussed; the Rishonim often speak of "עכבר" stam, without deciding the species. The practical consequence: the field mouse forbids (except for 60), the town mouse opens a doubt decided case by case.

The doubt is not a countable half-doubt (Shach s.k. 4). The Shach sets a capital point: the doubt "improves or spoils?" does not count as a ספק to build a ספק ספיקא, because the gemara itself hesitated about it. A doubt left open in the Talmud does not have the status of an ordinary doubt that one adds. This is a methodological safeguard for this siman.

Le-ma'asse (the status of the mouse). In practice, a mouse fallen into beer or vinegar is treated as a serious case: the field mouse forbids (except for 60), the town mouse is a doubt that one does not "resolve" by stacking spek. Identifying the species, the liquid (beer/vinegar vs wine/oil), and the duration, is a question of fact. For the application to your situation, consult your Rav.

4. כבוש כמבושל מעת לעת — cold soaking

ולפיכך אם נפל לשכר או לחומץ בצונן והסירו שלם, אם לא שהה בתוכו מעת לעת — מותר. ואם היה רותח, או אפילו בצונן ושהה בתוכו מעת לעת... מותר בששים כנגד העכבר.

— שולחן ערוך יו״ד ק״ד:א

Situation	Measure	Note
Cold, removed whole, < 24 h	Permitted (nothing passed; doubt)	כבוש acts only from 24 h
Hot (רותח)	60 against the mouse	The heat makes taste exude
Cold but 24 h (מעת לעת) elapsed	60 against the mouse	כבוש כמבושל — as if cooked
Broken into filterable particles, or dissolved without substance	60 against the mouse	Filter what is filterable
Broken into particles impossible to filter (thick dish)	All forbidden, without nullification	One might swallow the substance (§5)

The 24-hour pivot. Cold soaking of twenty-four hours (מעת לעת) is the threshold: under it, cold and the mouse removed whole, the liquid has not absorbed the taste and one relies on the doubt (town mouse) to permit. Beyond — or from the outset if it was hot — כבוש כמבושל, one reasons as for cooking and 60 is needed. This is the direct link with siman 105 (the rules of soaking).

Le-ma'asse (soaking). Retain the 24-hour cold threshold, and the condition "removed whole." Once there is heat, or 24 hours elapsed, or the mouse has disintegrated, one evaluates in 60 — and if the particles are unfilterable in a thick dish, it is more severe still (§5). Counting the 24 hours exactly, judging "whole" or "broken up," is a question of fact. For the application to your situation, consult your Rav.

5. נחתך שאי אפשר לבררו — the inseparable prohibition

ואם נחתך לחתיכות דקות באופן שאי אפשר לסננו... הכל אסור ואינו בטל, מפני שחוששין שמא יפגע בעין האיסור ולא ירגיש בו.

— שולחן ערוך יו״ד ק״ד:א · הגה: ודווקא בשרץ, אבל בשאר איסורים אין לחוש (או"ה כלל ל"ב)

The central machloket of psak — Taz against Rama/Shach

Mehaber (seif 1): when the mouse has broken into particles impossible to filter (the wine/vinegar mixed into a thick dish), all is forbidden, without nullification — neither by 60 (לח בלח), nor by majority (יבש ביבש) — for we fear encountering the very substance of the prohibition (עין האיסור) without noticing it.
Rama (seif 1): this fear applies only to a שרץ (כעדשה, which has the status of a בריה); for other prohibitions, no concern (Issur ve-Heter, kelal 32).
Taz (s.k. 1) — vigorously disputes: the law of "recognizable-inseparable" applies to all prohibitions, not a חומרא specific to the שרץ. Proofs: (a) a crushed בריה (רסוקה) is nevertheless nullified (siman 101); (b) חצי שיעור אסור מן התורה — even less than a כעדשה; so the reason is not the שיעור-כעדשה, but the impossibility of separating; (c) analogy to a non-Jew's butter (siman 115). What is ניכר ולא ניתן לבררו → neither 60 nor רוב.
Shach (s.k. 3) — defends the Rama, with nuance: a שרץ כעדשה is not nullified if it remains unfilterable (like a בריה); but if it is totally unfilterable and imperceptible, it is nullified like יבש ביבש (Ran / Rashba, resp. 101), אזלינן בתר רובא.

הכרעה. In practice one retains the stringency of the Mehaber and the Taz in the real case of a thick dish where the creature disintegrated in a recognizable-inseparable way: one does not nullify, for one might swallow the substance. The Taz extends this stringency to every prohibition that is recognizable and inseparable, not the שרץ alone. The Shach, defending the Rama, concedes that a totally unfilterable prohibition (imperceptible) returns to the ordinary regime (nullified ברוב). Le-ma'asse, caution is required as soon as the substance remains detectable in the dish.

Le-ma'asse (the inseparable). When a creature fallen into a liquid mixes into a thick dish and disintegrates without being filterable, do not rely on the 60 nor on the majority: we fear the עין האיסור. The distinction "filterable / unfilterable," "recognizable / totally dissolved," is a delicate question of fact, and the Taz's extension to every prohibition is weighty. For the application to your situation, consult your Rav.

6. יין, שמן ושומן — נ״ט לפגם, and הקריבהו נא לפחתך

נפל ליין או לשמן או לשאר משקים — פוגם בודאי, ואין צריך ששים לבטל מה שפלט. הגה: וכן אם נפל לשומן... ויש מחמירין.

— שולחן ערוך יו״ד ק״ד:ב

Liquid	Status	Source / nuance
Wine, oil (and honey)	נ"ט לפגם — spoils for sure; no need for 60	Mehaber; wine and oil "must be fragrant" (Rambam, Taz s.k. 2)
Other liquids	Be stringent (forbidden) per the Maharshal	Taz s.k. 2: be stringent on all save wine/oil/honey
Fat (שומן)	Rama: spoils like wine → permitted; some are stringent	Maharshal / Bach are stringent; see §7

Why wine and oil spoil (Taz s.k. 2). The Mehaber rules that a mouse fallen into wine or oil spoils them for sure — they "must be fragrant" (Rambam), and the mouse alters them — so no need for 60 for what it exuded. The Taz adds: honey (דבש) too is spoiled according to all. For other liquids, the Maharshal is stringent; the Taz holds to be stringent on all save wine, oil, and honey.

הקריבהו נא לפחתך (the repulsive fat). Where the fat soiled by the mouse is repulsive to eat, the Rama teaches that it is forbidden to kindle it [as fuel] in the synagogue — in the name of the verse הקריבהו נא לפחתך ("Present it, then, to your governor" — one does not offer to Heaven what one would not present to a dignitary). The reference is to Orach Chaim 124. The Taz (s.k. 4) specifies: repulsive fat without 60 is forbidden even for kindling; with 60, kindling is permitted.

Le-ma'asse (wine, oil, repulsive fat). Mouse in wine or oil (or honey) → they spoil, no need for 60 — but of course one does not consume a liquid in which a creature lies. For other liquids, one is stringent. Fat that has become repulsive does not even serve as fuel for the synagogue. Judging "spoils or improves" by the liquid is a question of fact. For the application to your situation, consult your Rav.

7. נטילת מקום וספק ספיקא — the hard fat

The fat (seif 2) — מחלוקת Rama / יש מחמירים

Rama (lenient): if the fat is hard before us (or the mouse found on it), it suffices to remove the spot (נטילת מקום); one does not presume it was soft at the fall. Reason: כבוש כמבושל, and a ספק ספיקא — doubt whether it fell when it was hard, and even if it was soft, perhaps it hardened before the soaking time.
יש מחמירים (stringent): if the fat is hard before us but one poured boiling fat onto it day after day, with doubt that the mouse was there when one poured → all forbidden even with 60 against the mouse (Maharshal / Bach; Shach s.k. 5-6: whatever one pours touches the mouse and becomes forbidden).
Conduct: if one did not pour onto it, or poured knowing the mouse absent, and the fat arrives hard → נטילת מקום suffices. In great loss, one may rely on the lenient.

The ספק ספיקא of the Taz / Rama, and the Shach's reservation. The double doubt that permits (hard fat): (1) perhaps the mouse fell when the fat was already hard (so nothing passed); (2) even if it was soft, perhaps it hardened before the 24 hours of soaking. Note: this ספק ספיקא rests on כבוש כמבושל, not on the doubt "improves/spoils" — for the Shach (s.k. 4) established that the latter does not count as a spek (the gemara hesitated). One therefore does not build the double doubt from it.

Le-ma'asse (the hard fat). Solid fat in which a mouse is found: per the Rama, נטילת מקום (removing the spot) suffices, by ספק ספיקא. But if one poured boiling fat with doubt about the mouse's presence, the מחמירים forbid even with 60. In great loss, one relies on the lenient. Judging "hard or soft at the fall," "did one pour onto it," is a question of fact. For the application to your situation, consult your Rav.

8. דברים המאוסים — ants, flies, gnats

דברים המאוסים שנפש האדם קצה בהם, כגון נמלים וזבובים ויתושים... אף על פי שנתערבו במאכל ונמחה גופן בתוכו, אם ההיתר רבה עליהם — מותרים. ומכל מקום כל מה שאפשר לבדוק ולסנן במסננת — בודקין ומסננין.

— שולחן ערוך יו״ד ק״ד:ג

Nullified in the majority (seif 3). The repulsive things from which the human soul recoils (דברים המאוסים) — ants, flies, gnats, which everyone avoids in disgust — are nullified in the majority (ברוב) even if their body has dissolved in the dish, as long as the permitted is the majority. Why this leniency? Because man turns away from them of himself; what is spoiled/repulsive in itself is not treated like a sought-after food.

Things spoiled in themselves are unanimous (Shach s.k. 9). The Shach stresses a fine point: the מאוס is permitted even if there is a כזית בכדי אכילת פרס (Rashba); and above all, the things spoiled in themselves (מאוס) are agreed by all — they do not fall under the מחלוקת of the נ"ט לפגם of 103:2. It is a category of its own, more lenient. But (Shach s.k. 8) what is repulsive specifically to him is forbidden to him, individually, even with 60.

Do not change the lenient custom (Taz s.k. 6; Rama 107:2). The Maharshal and the Bach are stringent on the repulsive things; but the Taz, referring to the Rama 107:2, teaches that one must not change the lenient custom received on this point. Nonetheless, the Beit Yossef (in the name of the Rashba) adds that in vinegar and beer, one must be wary as for the mouse (the liquid in which the creature perhaps improves).

Pitchei Teshuva (s.k. 1): the term שרץ of the siman refers to the 8 שרצים that render טמא (forbidden from a כעדשה); the other creatures forbid only from a כזית (Tiferet LeMoshe, Chavot Yair). A distinction that weighs on the "all forbidden" of seif 1.

Le-ma'asse (the repulsive things). An ant, a fly, or a gnat dissolved in a dish where the permitted is the majority is nullified ברוב — but one filters and removes whatever is detectable, and in vinegar/beer one is vigilant as for the mouse. One does not become stringent against the received custom, nor lenient beyond it. Judging "majority," "filterable," "species of the creature," is a question of fact. For the application to your situation, consult your Rav.

9. פסיקת הספרדים בזמננו — the contemporary Sephardic psika

Note on method. The responsa that follow (Yabia Omer, Yalkut Yossef, Or LeTzion) extend the principles of siman 104 above to modern cases (insects in packaged food). They do not appear in the corpus of the siman; they are cited as recognized streams of psika, to be confirmed with a Rav before any application.

The contemporary Sephardic psika (the school of Rav Ovadia Yosef, Rav Ben-Tzion Abba Shaul) begins exactly from the framework of the Mehaber: the נ"ט לשבח / לפגם status according to the mouse and the liquid, the threshold of כבוש כמבושל מעת לעת, and the stringency of the נחתך שאי אפשר לבררו. On the repulsive creatures, the Sephardic school retains the nullification ברוב of the Mehaber and the Shach (the things spoiled in themselves), while requiring to filter and check what is detectable — hence the sustained attention to insects in leafy vegetables, flours, and dried fruit.

Concrete case	Sephardic orientation (to be verified)
Mouse/creature in beer or vinegar	נ"ט לשבח (field) or doubt (town); כבוש כמבושל at 24 h; cold < 24 h removed whole → one may be lenient.
Insect dissolved in a thick dish, unfilterable	One follows the stringency of the Mehaber/Taz: no nullification, we fear the עין האיסור.
Mouse in wine / oil	Spoils for sure (no need for 60) — but one does not consume the soiled liquid.
Ant / fly dissolved, permitted is majority	Nullified ברוב (מאוס); filter and check the filterable.

Anchoring in the siman. All of this follows from the text: נ"ט לשבח / לפגם (seif 1-2), כבוש כמבושל (seif 1), נחתך שאי אפשר לבררו (seif 1), נ"ט לפגם of wine/oil (seif 2), and the nullification ברוב of the repulsive things (seif 3). The contemporary responsa apply these rules to today's food.

10. פסיקת האשכנזים — the Ashkenazi psika

Note on method. The same remark applies: these streams extend the Rama and the nossei kelim; they are cited as landmarks of psika, to be confirmed with a Rav.

The Ashkenazi psika begins from the Rama and the acharonim (Pri Megadim, Chavot Yair, and the kashrut compendia). Two features of the Rama dominate this siman: (1) the limitation to the שרץ of the "all forbidden" inseparable case (seif 1) — which the Taz disputes and the Shach defends with nuance; (2) on the fat (seif 2), the Rama's leniency (נטילת מקום, ספק ספיקא) against the יש מחמירים (Maharshal, Bach). And on the repulsive things, the Taz (referring to 107:2) forbids changing the lenient custom.

Concrete case	Ashkenazi orientation (to be verified)
Inseparable in a thick dish	Rama: only שרץ; Taz: every prohibition; in practice, caution as soon as the substance is detectable.
Hard fat, mouse on it	Rama: נטילת מקום (ספק ספיקא); יש מחמירים if boiling fat poured with doubt → all forbidden even with 60.
Repulsive things dissolved	Nullified ברוב; do not change the lenient custom (Taz, Rama 107:2); filter the filterable.
Vinegar / beer	Vigilance as for the mouse (Beit Yossef in the name of the Rashba).

Chabad — only through real sources. The Shulchan Aruch HaRav does not cover Yoreh De'ah; there is therefore no "Da'at HaRav" on siman 104. For the Chabad practice on these questions, 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 ruling he did not write here.

11. מקרים מודרניים — today's kitchen

How siman 104 sheds light on the kitchen. Four tools of the siman serve to decide modern cases: (1) נ"ט לשבח / לפגם (seif 1-2); (2) כבוש כמבושל at 24 h (seif 1); (3) נחתך שאי אפשר לבררו (seif 1); (4) the nullification ברוב of the repulsive things (seif 3).

Modern case	Tool of the siman	Orientation (to be confirmed with the Rav)
An insect (gnat) found in a bottle of wine or juice	Seif 1-2 (נ"ט לפגם; כבוש)	Wine → spoils; but one removes the insect and examines. Cold < 24 h, insect removed whole → one may be lenient; otherwise → 60. Vinegar/beer → vigilance as for the mouse.
A gnat fallen and dissolved in a pot (thick dish)	Seif 1 (נחתך שאי אפשר לבררו)	If unfilterable and recognizable → no nullification (Mehaber/Taz). If filterable → one filters; if totally dissolved and imperceptible → debated (Shach: ברוב).
An ant / a fly in a liquid dish	Seif 3 (דברים המאוסים)	Permitted is majority → nullified ברוב (מאוס); filter and remove the detectable. But one does not consume a dish in which one sees the creature.
Insects in flour, leafy vegetables, dried fruit	Seif 3 (check and filter)	Whatever is checkable/filterable must be checked and filtered; this is the heart of the practical kashrut of bedikat tola'im (siman 100, 84).
A creature in vinegar or beer	Seif 1 + 3 (heightened vigilance)	These liquids → we are wary as for the mouse (Rashba); one does not settle for nullification ברוב.

Le-ma'asse. These situations blend questions of fact — the species of the creature, the liquid (wine/oil vs vinegar/beer), the cold duration, whether it is filterable or not, the extent of the loss — that only your Rav can decide upon seeing the case. The practical rule: reconstruct precisely what fell, where, for how long, and whether one can filter. For the application to your situation, consult your Rav.

12. סיכום מעשי — summary and tables

טבלה — the avenues of prohibition, in practice

Case	Measure (for us)	Note
Field mouse (royal dish)	נ"ט לשבח → forbidden (except for 60)	It certainly improves
Town mouse, cold, whole, < 24 h	Permitted (doubt)	כבוש acts only at 24 h
Hot, or 24 h, or broken up/filterable	60 against the mouse	כבוש כמבושל
Broken up unfilterable (thick dish)	All forbidden (עין האיסור)	Taz: every prohibition; Rama: שרץ
Wine, oil, honey	נ"ט לפגם → no need for 60	They "must be fragrant"
Hard fat, mouse on it	נטילת מקום (ספק ספיקא)	יש מחמירים if boiling fat poured
Repulsive fat	Forbidden even to kindle it	הקריבהו נא לפחתך (OH 124)
Repulsive things (ant, fly)	Nullified ברוב (מאוס)	Filter the filterable; vinegar/beer → vigilance

טבלה — who says what (the nossei kelim of the siman)

Posek	Decisive contribution (anchored in the corpus)
Mehaber (seifim 1-3)	עכברא דדברא / דמתא; כבוש כמבושל מעת לעת; נחתך שאי אפשר לבררו → all forbidden; wine/oil נ"ט לפגם; דברים המאוסים nullified ברוב.
Rama (הגה)	The "all forbidden" inseparable applies only to a שרץ (seif 1, או"ה 32); the fat → like wine, נטילת מקום and ספק ספיקא, but יש מחמירים (seif 2).
Shach (Siftei Kohen)	s.k. 1: field improves, "table of kings" still safek, עכבר stam; s.k. 3: defends Rashi/Rama (שרץ כעדשה not nullified if unfilterable), but totally unfilterable = יבש ביבש nullified (Ran/Rashba 101); s.k. 4: the safek improves/spoils is not countable; s.k. 8: repulsive "to him" forbidden even with 60; s.k. 9: מאוס permitted even כזית בכא"פ, the things spoiled in themselves are unanimous.
Taz (Turei Zahav)	s.k. 1: disputes the Rama — the inseparable applies to all prohibitions; חצי שיעור even < כעדשה; analogy to a non-Jew's butter (115); s.k. 2: wine/oil/honey spoil (Rambam), be stringent on the others (Maharshal); s.k. 3: hard fat, ספק ספיקא; s.k. 4: repulsive fat without 60 forbidden even for kindling; s.k. 6: מאוסים — do not change the lenient custom (Rama 107:2).
Pri Megadim (פר״מ)	Refines the מחלוקת Rama/Taz on the inseparable and the definition of שרץ כעדשה (בריה).
Pitchei Teshuva (פתחי תשובה)	s.k. 1: שרץ = the 8 שרצים (כעדשה), the others = כזית (Tiferet LeMoshe, Chavot Yair); s.k. 3: Chatam Sofer (94) — does a living creature that fell exude? vs Chikrei Lev (one counts the 24 h only from death); s.k. 4: utensils → ספק ספיקא if doubt of use (Chout HaShani, Minhat Yaakov); s.k. 5: kindling (Rashbash).

טבלה — contemporary streams of psika (outside the corpus, to be verified)

Sephardic: the school of Rav Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer, Yehaveh Da'at), Yalkut Yossef; Or LeTzion (Rav Ben-Tzion Abba Shaul). They extend the Mehaber: נ"ט לשבח / לפגם, כבוש כמבושל, נחתך שאי אפשר לבררו; nullification ברוב of the repulsive things, with the requirement to check and filter the detectable (bedikat tola'im).

Ashkenazi: acharonim (Pri Megadim, Chavot Yair) and kashrut compendia. They extend the Rama and the Taz: limitation to the שרץ vs extension to every prohibition, the fat (נטילת מקום / ספק ספיקא vs יש מחמירים), do not change the lenient custom on the מאוסים.

Chabad: no Shulchan Aruch HaRav on the YD. One cites only real sources — responsa of the Tzemach Tzedek, the Sefer HaMinhagim — when they explicitly address the point.

Sefaria links (text and nossei kelim)

Shulchan Aruch YD 104: 104:1 · 104:2 · 104:3
Shach (Siftei Kohen): 104 s.k. 1 · 104 s.k. 3 · 104 s.k. 9
Taz (Turei Zahav): 104 s.k. 1 · 104 s.k. 6
Pitchei Teshuva: 104 s.k. 1 · 104 s.k. 3

👈 הלכה למעשה — the golden rule of this level

In substance, retain the three axes: נ"ט לשבח / לפגם (according to the mouse and the liquid), כבוש כמבושל מעת לעת, and the yesod of נחתך שאי אפשר לבררו (the inseparable is not nullified).
In practice, the field mouse forbids (except for 60), the town mouse = doubt; wine/oil spoil; and as soon as a creature disintegrates, unfilterable, in a thick dish → one relies neither on 60 nor on the majority.
The repulsive things (ants, flies, gnats) are nullified ברוב even dissolved, but one filters the filterable and is vigilant in vinegar/beer; one does not change the received custom.
And for any real case — species, liquid, duration, filterable or not, extent of loss — halakha le-ma'asse goes through your Rav.

← Level 3 — Synthesis ↑ Siman ק״ד — contents

~ ~ ~ ~ ~
DAAT · הרב יוסף חיים סממה
תלמיד חכם · מעביר שיעורים בהלכה ובחסידות
פסק והלכה למעשה בדין עכבר שנמצא ביין או בשכר · סימן ק״ד · ⚖️ 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.

📖Join the khavruta