Siman 106 — How One Nullifies in Sixty: Proportional Reckoning (לפי חשבון) and a Piece That Absorbed Issur
Proportionally, the piece that stays forbidden, liquid or solid — to discover and understand
יורה דעה · סימן ק״ו
דִּין הֵיאַךְ מְבַטְּלִין בְּשִׁשִּׁים
🌱 Introduction Level · מתחילים
✦ ❖ ✦
A piece that absorbed a prohibition without sixty against it, then falls into a pot, prohibits only proportionally to the issur it contains (לפי חשבון): if the pot plus the piece total sixty against the absorbed issur, the rest is permitted — but the piece itself remains forbidden (אפשר לסוחטו אסור). The liquid (נבלל ונימוח) / solid (יבש) distinction, and per our practice חתיכה נעשית נבילה for all prohibitions; plus the practical conduct for removing a piece from a pot — Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 106 — 2 seifim.
Topic: How one nullifies in sixty — לפי חשבון, the piece that stays forbidden, liquid vs solid Source: שולחן ערוך יורה דעה סימן ק״ו
Compilation: הרב יוסף חיים סממה DAAT · daattorah.com
📑 Study plan
1.The Mehaber's text: the 2 seifim, in full
2.Context: why this siman comes after the laws of mixture and nullification
3.The key concepts: לפי חשבון, אפשר לסוחטו אסור, נבלל ונימוח / יבש, חנ״נ…
4.Liquid or solid?: the proportional-reckoning table
5.The Shach and the Taz: who they are, a few key entries
6.The Rama's gloss (הגה)
7.חתיכה נעשית נבילה: the great Mehaber / Rama divergence
8.Modern practical cases: a forbidden piece in a dish, removing food from a pot
9.Synthesis and comprehension questions
1. The Mehaber's text — the 2 seifim
Siman 106 carries a clear title: דין היאך מבטלין בששים — "the law: how one nullifies in sixty." After the simanim that laid down the principle of nullification in sixty (ביטול בששים) and the notion of חתיכה נעשית נבילה (the piece that becomes נבילה, siman 92), the Mehaber (Rabbi Yossef Karo) here refines a pointed question: against what exactly do we count the sixty when a piece that already absorbed a prohibition falls back into a pot? And from it he draws a practical conduct for removing a piece from a pot. Two seifim, but very dense.
Seif 1 — לפי חשבון: proportional reckoning, and the piece that stays forbidden
Seif 1 — A piece that absorbed a prohibition, fallen into a pot
A piece that absorbed a prohibition (חתיכה שבלעה איסור) and does not have sixty to nullify it, which falls into a pot: it prohibits only proportionally to the issur it contains (לפי חשבון איסור שבה). If what is in the pot, joined to the piece itself, totals sixty against the issur absorbed in it → what is in the pot is permitted. But the piece itself is forbidden, because the issur within it does not come out of it completely (אינו נפלט ממנה לגמרי). And this is unlike a thing that mixes and dissolves (נבלל ונימוח): if blood (or the like) fell into a permitted broth (רוטב) and prohibited it because of its small amount, and then the permitted broth increased until it totals sixty to nullify all the blood → everything is permitted, because the whole is mixed and dissolved. Rama's gloss: and for us, who say חתיכה נעשית נבילה for all prohibitions, there is no difference between liquid and solid, except on this point: if the thing rendered forbidden is solid (יבש) and there is sixty against it, the piece forbidden first remains in its prohibition, and one must remove it if one recognizes it; if one does not recognize it → it is nullified, unless it is a חתיכה הראויה להתכבד; but if it is liquid, everything is permitted once there is sixty against what was forbidden first. See simanim 92 and 99.
The central idea: carefully distinguish the absorbed issur from the piece carrying it. When this piece falls into the pot, it does not "contaminate" its whole volume — it only diffuses the issur it contains. So we count sixty against that absorbed issur alone, and — a crucial detail — the piece itself joins the count of the sixty (מצורף עם החתיכה עצמה). If we manage it, the rest of the pot is permitted. But the original piece itself stays forbidden: the issur it drank never comes out completely.
אפשר לסוחטו אסור — "what could be squeezed out of it is forbidden": the absorbed issur never comes out completely from the piece that drank it. Even when the rest of the pot is permitted (sixty against the issur), the piece itself stays forbidden — this is the meaning of אינו נפלט ממנה לגמרי.
Liquid ≠ solid. The Mehaber opposes the piece (solid) to a thing that mixes and dissolves (נבלל ונימוח). A liquid issur (e.g. blood) fallen into a permitted broth melts into the mass: if one adds permitted matter up to sixty against all the blood, everything is permitted, since there is no carrier "piece" that would stay forbidden. The Rama (per our practice of saying חנ״נ everywhere) clarifies how this distinction plays out: for a solid thing one removes the forbidden piece; for a liquid, everything is permitted once there is sixty.
Seif 2 — The practical conduct: removing a piece from a pot
Seif 2 — When may one take a piece out of the pot?
A piece that contains חֵלֶב (forbidden fat), cooked in a pot that has sixty to nullify the חלב: one must take care not to remove anything from the pot as long as the forbidden piece is still inside — for we fear that it might remain last, at a time when there is no longer sixty in the pot to nullify the חלב. And one shall also not take it out first, for the חלב within it would forbid it. What is the remedy? To leave it until the pot cools (עד שתצטנן הקדרה). Rama's gloss: and for us, who hold חתיכה נעשית נבילה, one removes the forbidden piece and the rest is permitted.
The trap of the seif: taking a piece out at the wrong moment can flip everything. As long as the piece of חלב bathes in the pot, its sixty volumes of permitted matter nullify it. But (a) if one removes the other pieces first, the forbidden piece may remain last without enough permitted matter around it to nullify it; (b) if one removes the forbidden piece first, the חלב it contains forbids it the moment it leaves the bath of sixty. While the pot is hot, the best is therefore to touch nothing.
The Mehaber's remedy: wait until the pot cools (שתצטנן). When cold, the exchange of taste no longer happens: one can then remove the pieces without fearing that the issur will "reactivate." But for us (Rama), who hold חתיכה נעשית נבילה, the solution is more direct: one simply removes the forbidden piece — itself become נבילה and nullified by the sixty — and all the rest is permitted.
2. Context — where this siman stands
The preceding simanim laid down the great principles of mixtures in kashrut: nullification in sixty (ביטול בששים), the diffusion of taste (טעם כעיקר), and — at siman 92 — the great notion of חתיכה נעשית נבילה, "the piece becomes נבילה." Siman 106 answers a finer question: once a piece has absorbed a prohibition, how does one recount the sixty when that piece falls back into a new dish? And — seif 2 — how does one practically handle such a piece in the pot without forbidding everything?
The two questions of the siman
Question
Where?
Typical answer
Against what do we count the sixty?
Seif 1
Against the absorbed issur alone (לפי חשבון); the piece joins the count
Is the piece itself permitted?
Seif 1
No: אפשר לסוחטו אסור — it stays forbidden
Liquid (נבלל ונימוח) or solid (יבש)?
Seif 1
Liquid → all permitted at sixty; solid → the original piece stays forbidden
Removing a piece from the pot
Seif 2
Neither last nor first; let it cool (or, per the Rama, remove the piece)
The cross-cutting idea: everything depends on what we count, and on what "comes out." The absorbed issur never comes out entirely from the piece that drank it (אפשר לסוחטו אסור) — hence a piece that stays forbidden even when the pot is permitted. Conversely, a liquid issur that dissolves has no "carrier": at sixty, it vanishes entirely.
3. The key concepts of this siman
To understand Siman 106, one must master a short technical vocabulary describing how the issur is counted, comes out (or not) and dissolves.
לפי חשבון — "proportionally": a piece that only absorbed a prohibition (and is not forbidden in itself), fallen into a pot, prohibits only in proportion to the absorbed issur. We count sixty against the absorbed issur alone (not against the whole piece), and the piece itself joins the count of the sixty.
אפשר לסוחטו אסור — "what could be squeezed out of it is forbidden": the absorbed issur never comes out completely from the piece (אינו נפלט ממנה לגמרי) → the piece itself stays forbidden, even when the rest of the pot is permitted.
חתיכה נעשית נבילה (chnn) — "the piece becomes נבילה": a piece of permitted food that absorbed a prohibition without sixty itself becomes a prohibition in its entirety. The Mehaber holds it only in בשר בחלב; the Rama / our practice extends it to all prohibitions → one then needs sixty against the whole piece (see siman 92).
נבלל ונימוח — "mixed and dissolved": a liquid issur (e.g. blood) fallen into a permitted broth melts into the mass. If one adds permitted matter up to sixty against all the issur → everything is permitted: there is no carrier "piece" that would stay forbidden. To be contrasted with a solid piece (יבש).
יבש — "solid": a solid thing rendered forbidden (the original piece) stays forbidden even when there is sixty around it; one must remove it if one recognizes it, and — if one does not recognize it — it is nullified, unless it is a חתיכה הראויה להתכבד (siman 101).
צירוף החתיכה עצמה — "the piece joins the count": to reach the sixty against the absorbed issur, one counts not only the contents of the pot but also the volume of the piece itself (מצורף עם החתיכה עצמה) — since that volume, itself, is permitted.
A common thread: everything rests on the difference between absorbing (the piece carries the issur, which does not quite come out → אפשר לסוחטו אסור) and dissolving (the liquid melts, with no carrier → all permitted at sixty). The Rama adds our principle of חנ״נ, which changes against what we count the sixty.
4. Liquid or solid — the reckoning table
The whole of seif 1 boils down to a table. We cross what fell in? (a piece that absorbed, or a liquid that dissolves) with how much permitted matter?, and we look at what we count the sixty against.
Situation
Sixty against what?
Result
Piece that absorbed a prohibition, fallen into the pot (לפי חשבון)
Against the absorbed issur alone (the piece joins the count)
🟡 Pot permitted — but the piece itself stays forbidden
Liquid issur (blood…) fallen then diluted up to sixty (נבלל ונימוח)
Against all the dissolved issur
🟢 Everything is permitted (no residual carrier)
Thing rendered forbidden solid (יבש), sixty against it (Rama)
Against the issur; one removes the piece if recognized
🟡 The original piece stays forbidden (to be removed)
Solid not recognized, not ראוי להתכבד
Nullified in the mass
🟢 Nullified (otherwise → davar hashuv, siman 101)
Thing rendered forbidden liquid (Rama), sixty against it
Against what was forbidden first
🟢 Everything is permitted
The logic in one sentence: a solid that absorbed carries its issur (אפשר לסוחטו אסור) — we count sixty against the issur, but the piece itself stays on the sidelines; a liquid that dissolves has no carrier — at sixty, it vanishes entirely.
The Rama's point (seif 1): per our practice of saying חנ״נ in all prohibitions, the liquid/solid distinction does not change the underlying principle — it only governs whether one removes a piece (solid) or whether everything is at once permitted (liquid) once the sixty is reached.
5. The Shach and the Taz — the great commentators
In Yoreh De'ah, the Shulchan Aruch is never read alone. Two great commentaries accompany it on every page and structure practical study: the Shach and the Taz. They are the reference nossei kelim in Yoreh De'ah (no Mishna Berurah here, which comments only on Orach Chaim).
The Shach (ש״ך) — abbreviation of שפתי כהן, Siftei Kohen, by Rabbi Shabtai haCohen (Lithuania, 17th century). It is the reference commentary on Yoreh De'ah, of great analytical depth.
The Taz (ט״ז) — abbreviation of טורי זהב, Turei Zahav, by Rabbi David haLevi Segal (Poland, 17th century). Often in dialogue — and sometimes in disagreement — with the Shach.
A key entry of the Shach
Shach s.k. 1 — לפי חשבון: the Mehaber's position, and our practice
The Shach explains that לפי חשבון is the Mehaber's position: in the other prohibitions (besides meat-and-milk), there is no חנ״נ, so only the absorbed issur counts, and the piece is forbidden only by אפשר לסוחטו אסור. But for us, who hold חנ״נ in all prohibitions, it is different — one needs sixty against the whole piece (see siman 99:3,5).
A key entry of the Taz
Taz s.k. 2 — Why seif 2 differs from seif 1
The Taz illuminates seif 2: here, if one leaves the piece until cooling, it is permitted — unlike seif 1, where the piece was already forbidden by the issur it had absorbed. In seif 2 the piece has not yet absorbed the חלב upon it, and its פליטה (what it exudes) spreads equally through the pot; as long as there is sixty, it is nullified.
One sees the method: the Shach and the Taz do not repeat the Mehaber — they locate the dispute (Mehaber: no חנ״נ in the other prohibitions; us: חנ״נ everywhere) and distinguish the two seifim (already absorbed vs not yet absorbed). This is exactly what one deepens at the Lamdan level, with the sugya of the כחל (Chullin 100) and the Rashba's reading.
6. The Rama's gloss (הגה)
The Rama (Rabbi Moshe Isserles) adds to the Mehaber's text glosses reflecting Ashkenazi practice and clarifying the practical law. Here are his interventions in our siman.
On seif 1 — חנ״נ in all prohibitions, and the liquid / solid distinction
Rama's gloss: ולדידן דאמרינן בכל האסורין חתיכה נעשית נבילה, אין חילוק בין לח ליבש, רק לענין זה… — "and for us, who say חתיכה נעשית נבילה in all prohibitions, there is no difference between liquid and solid, except on this point". For a solid (יבש) thing rendered forbidden, the piece forbidden first remains in its prohibition and one must remove it if one recognizes it (otherwise it is nullified, unless חתיכה הראויה להתכבד); but for a liquid, everything is permitted once there is sixty. The Rama refers to simanim 92 and 99.
On seif 2 — one simply removes the forbidden piece
Rama's gloss: ולדידן דקיימא לן חתיכה נעשית נבילה, מסירין החתיכה האסורה והשאר מותר — "and for us, who hold חתיכה נעשית נבילה, one removes the forbidden piece and the rest is permitted". Where the Mehaber recommends waiting for cooling, the Rama rules more simply: since the piece has itself become נבילה and there is sixty against it, one removes it outright, and all the rest of the pot is permitted.
The Rama carefully distinguishes the base law (the Mehaber: no חנ״נ in the other prohibitions, hence the proportional reckoning and the remedy of waiting for cooling) from Ashkenazi practice (חנ״נ in all prohibitions, hence one simply removes the forbidden piece). This is the most important practical divergence of this siman.
7. חתיכה נעשית נבילה — the great Mehaber / Rama divergence
Siman 106 can only be understood in light of the great מחלוקת of siman 92: does a piece that absorbed a prohibition itself become נבילה?
Everything rests on a question: against what do we count the sixty?
Per the Mehaber (no חנ״נ outside meat-and-milk): we count sixty against the absorbed issur alone (לפי חשבון); the piece is forbidden only by אפשר לסוחטו אסור.
Per the Rama / our practice (חנ״נ in all prohibitions): the whole piece has become נבילה — one needs sixty against the whole piece (see siman 92).
Case
חנ״נ?
Sixty against what?
Meat-and-milk (Mehaber + Rama)
🔴 Yes (always)
Against the whole piece
Other prohibitions — per the Mehaber (106)
🟢 No
Against the absorbed issur alone (לפי חשבון)
Other prohibitions — Rama's practice
🟡 Yes
Against the whole piece
Dissolved liquid (נבלל ונימוח)
🟢 No
Against all the issur → all permitted
The original piece (that absorbed)
—
Stays forbidden (אפשר לסוחטו אסור)
The practical consequence is clear: for the Mehaber (Sephardi practice), a piece that absorbed a prohibition prohibits only proportionally — sixty against the absorbed issur suffices for the pot, but the piece stays forbidden. For the Rama (Ashkenazi practice), the whole piece is נבילה — one needs sixty against all of it, and one removes it. This is the divergence to know. For the application to your situation, consult your Rav.
8. Modern practical cases
How do these rules apply in our kitchens today? Here are three common situations illuminated by our siman.
Case 1 — A "problematic" piece of meat re-cooked in another dish
A meatball that had absorbed a little of a prohibition (without sixty against it), then put back to cook in a large pot. Seif 1 commands: we count sixty against the absorbed issur alone (לפי חשבון), the volume of the piece joining the count. If they are reached, the pot is permitted — but per the Mehaber, that meatball stays forbidden (אפשר לסוחטו אסור); and per our practice (Rama), it has become נבילה and one needs sixty against its whole volume. For the practical halacha, consult your Rav.
Case 2 — Removing a piece from a still-hot pot
A piece containing a trace of issur cooks in a pot that has a good sixty to nullify it (seif 2). While the pot is hot, remove neither the other pieces first (the forbidden piece would risk remaining last without sixty around it), nor this piece first (the issur it carries would forbid it on the way out). The Mehaber's remedy: let it cool. Per the Rama: remove the forbidden piece, the rest is permitted. For the practical halacha, consult your Rav.
Case 3 — A liquid prohibition diluted in a large permitted volume
A small amount of a liquid prohibition falls into a permitted broth and forbids it (lacking sixty); then one adds a lot of permitted matter. Seif 1 (נבלל ונימוח) teaches: a liquid dissolves in the mass — if one reaches sixty against all the issur, everything is permitted, since there is no carrier "piece" that would stay forbidden. This is the exact opposite of the solid-piece case. For the practical halacha, consult your Rav.
The common thread of the three cases: before panicking, ask yourself three questions — is it a piece that absorbed (it stays forbidden) or a liquid that dissolves (it vanishes at sixty)? against what do we count the sixty? when do we remove the piece? But the concrete decision always belongs to the Rav, who knows the details of fact.
9. Synthesis of Siman 106
The essence of Siman 106 in a few sentences:
A piece that absorbed a prohibition and falls back into a pot prohibits only proportionally (לפי חשבון) — sixty against the absorbed issur alone, the piece joining the count (seif 1).
If those sixty are reached, the pot is permitted — but the piece itself stays forbidden (אפשר לסוחטו אסור), since the issur does not come out of it completely (seif 1).
A dissolving liquid (נבלל ונימוח) is different: at sixty against all the issur, everything is permitted — no residual carrier (seif 1).
Per the Rama / our practice (חנ״נ everywhere), for a solid (יבש) one removes the forbidden piece if recognized; for a liquid, everything is permitted once there is sixty (seif 1).
To remove a piece from the pot (seif 2): neither last nor first; the Mehaber's remedy is to let it cool.
Per the Rama, one simply removes the forbidden piece (become נבילה), and all the rest is permitted (seif 2).
Memory table
Situation
Measure
Piece that absorbed, fallen into the pot
🟡 Sixty against the absorbed issur (לפי חשבון) — pot permitted
The original piece itself
🔴 Stays forbidden (אפשר לסוחטו אסור)
Liquid issur diluted up to sixty
🟢 נבלל ונימוח → all permitted
Solid (יבש) forbidden, sixty against it (Rama)
🟡 Remove the piece if recognized
Removing a piece from a hot pot
🔴 Neither last nor first — let it cool
Per the Rama (חנ״נ)
🟢 Remove the forbidden piece, the rest is permitted
Comprehension questions
Check your understanding:
What is לפי חשבון (seif 1)? Against what do we count the sixty, and what joins the count?
Explain אפשר לסוחטו אסור. Why does the original piece stay forbidden while the pot is permitted?
What difference does the Mehaber make between a solid piece and a thing נבלל ונימוח (liquid)?
What does the Rama rule about the liquid / solid (יבש) distinction in seif 1?
In seif 2, why must one not remove the forbidden piece first, nor the other pieces first?
What is the Mehaber's remedy in seif 2? And what does the Rama rule (חנ״נ)?
What is the great practical divergence Mehaber / Rama of this siman, and its link to siman 92?
What does the Shach (s.k. 1) say about לפי חשבון? And the Taz (s.k. 2) about the difference between seifim 1 and 2?
To go further
If you want to deepen this siman:
📚 Level 2 — Lamdan: the pilpul, the sugya of the כחל (Chullin 100), אפשר לסוחטו limited to בשר בחלב, the Rashba's reading, the yesod of חתיכה נעשית נבילה, anchored in the sugyot
✨ Level 3 — Synthesis: the comparative tables (לפי חשבון / חנ״נ, liquid / solid), the golden rules, and quick memorization of the 2 seifim
⚖️ Level 4 — Halacha lema'asse: practical ruling (Shach, Taz, Pri Megadim, Pitchei Teshuva) and contemporary poskim, the Sephardi / Ashkenazi divergence
The sources for this level can be consulted on Sefaria: