✦ ❖ ✦

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

שולחן ערוך · יורה דעה

Siman 107 — Cooking Eggs (and the Order of Removal), and a Repulsive Creature Found in Food — Practical psika

סימן ק״ז · הלכה למעשה

דִּין הַמְבַשֵּׁל בֵּיצִים וְדָבָר מָאוּס הַנִּמְצָא בַּתַּבְשִׁיל

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״ז (ב׳ 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 107.
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 (how many eggs, the moment of removal, whether one poured everything out at once, the age of the utensil, salting or cooking) that only a posek who sees your situation can decide.

📑 תוכן העניינים

שורש הסימן — סדר ההוצאה והאיסור הנשאר באחרונה (סעיף א')
פסק המחבר והרמ״א — מסגרת ההלכה בב׳ סעיפים
לא מחזקינן איסורא — יש אוסרים / יש מתירין, וכן עיקר (סעיף א')
ביצים מול דגים — אסימטריית הביטול ברוב (סעיף א')
מעמידין הכלי על חזקתו — והדם / הציר דרבנן (סעיף א')
הזבוב והדבר המאוס — נ״ט לפגם והמנהג (סעיף ב')
הכף — ס' כנגד האיסור וחתיכה נעשית נבילה לכלי (סעיף ב')
כלי ראשון לחומרא — ומעט התבשיל שעל הכף (סעיף ב')
פסיקת הספרדים בזמננו — Yabia Omer, Yalkut Yossef, Or LeTzion
פסיקת האשכנזים — the acharonim and poskim
מקרים מודרניים — Hard eggs one by one, an insect in the soup, a non-kosher spoon
סיכום מעשי וטבלאות — ולמעשה, שאל את רבך

📜 The text of the Shulchan Aruch — Seif Alef

הַמְבַשֵּׁל בֵּיצִים הַרְבֵּה בִּקְלִפָּתָן, לֹא יוֹצִיאֵם מֵהַמַּיִם שֶׁנִּתְבַּשְּׁלוּ בָּהֶם עַד שֶׁיִּצְטַנְּנוּ, אוֹ יִתֵּן עֲלֵיהֶם מַיִם צוֹנְנִים לְצַנְּנָם, וְאַחַר כָּךְ יוֹצִיאֵם, מִשּׁוּם דְּחַיְישִׁינַן שֶׁמָּא יִמָּצֵא בְּאַחַת מֵהֶן אֶפְרוֹחַ.

דְּאִי הֲוָה מוֹצִיאָן אַחַת אַחַת קֹדֶם שֶׁיִּצְטַנְּנוּ, שֶׁמָּא תִּשָּׁאֵר זוֹ שֶׁל אֶפְרוֹחַ בָּאַחֲרוֹנָה וְלֹא יִשָּׁאֵר שִׁשִּׁים לְבַטְּלָהּ.

The order of removal. One who cooks many eggs in their shells must not remove them from the water in which they cooked until they cool, or else pour cold water over them to cool them, and then remove them — because we are concerned that a chick (אפרוח) [forbidden] may be found in one of them.

For if he were to remove them one by one while still hot, perhaps the one with the chick would remain last without there being 60 left to nullify it.

— Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 107:1 · basis: the concern of נשאר באחרונה and ביטול בששים · Sefaria YD 107:1

1. שורש הסימן — the order of removal, and the prohibition left last

The foundation. Siman 107 joins two dinim close in their logic: (a) the order of removal of similar items cooked together (eggs, small fish) when one of them is forbidden (an egg with a אפרוח/blood, a טריפה/unclean fish); (b) the repulsive creature fallen into the dish. The common yesod of seif 1: as one removes the items one by one, the number dwindles, and the prohibition risks being נשאר באחרונה — "left last" without 60 to nullify it, which then re-forbids the whole contents of the pot.

The Mehaber's remedy. To avoid this pitfall, the Mehaber prescribes two practices: either let them cool in their water before removing them, or pour cold water over them to cool them — for when cold there is no transfer of taste and no re-prohibition. It is only when one removes them hot and one by one that the concern of נשאר באחרונה arises.

Why "everything would be forbidden"

If the egg with the chick remains last without 60, it becomes forbidden; and since it cooked in the pot, the cooking water itself becomes forbidden (there is no longer 60 to nullify it), which in turn re-forbids everything that cooked there. The Rama (הגה) adds the parallel case: one has poured the eggs into a dish (קערה) and one of them was found טריפה — yesh osrim forbid everything, fearing the טריפה remained last in the pot without 60. So too for small fish where an unclean fish is found and one did not pour them out all at once.

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

Siman 107 contains 2 seifim. The Mehaber lays the framework (the order of removal, then the repulsive creature); the Rama (הגה) glosses extensively, and above all establishes that "we do not presume the prohibition" (לא מחזקינן איסורא) — וכן עיקר, as well as the lenient custom on the fly. Here is the overall map, as it emerges from the text itself.

Seif	Subject	Psak (anchored in the text)
1	The order of removal (נשאר באחרונה)	Cooking many eggs: do not remove them one by one while hot (fear of the chick left last without 60); cool them first, or pour cold water. Rama: poured into a dish and one is טריפה (or unclean fish not poured at once) → yesh osrim; yesh matirin for לא מחזקינן איסורא (B"Y in the name of R. Shimshon) — וכן עיקר. And even the stringent ones do not forbid the utensils — מעמידין הכלי על חזקתו.
2	The repulsive creature; the spoon	A fly (זבוב) and repulsive creatures in a dish: one throws it out, the dish permitted — their פליטה when spoiled does not forbid (נ״ט לפגם). Rama: such is the widespread custom (B"Y, Rashba, Rokeach, Tur 104), though some are stringent; one does not change the custom. The spoon (כף) that drew out a non-spoiling prohibition, returned to the pot: one needs 60 against the prohibition (not against the whole spoon — no חנ״נ for a utensil); and if there was a little of the dish with the prohibition on the spoon → 60 also against that bit of the dish, which became נבילה (Issur ve-Heter kelal 27).

כלל הפסק של הסימן :
שני יסודות — נשאר באחרונה בסדר ההוצאה (וריפויו בצינון או בעירוי מים קרים), והכרעת לא מחזקינן איסורא (וכן עיקר לרמ״א) ; ובסעיף ב' — נותן טעם לפגם בדבר המאוס (הזבוב מותר), ואין חתיכה נעשית נבילה לכלי — ס' כנגד האיסור בלבד.

3. לא מחזקינן איסורא — do we presume the prohibition remained?

ויש מתירין בכל ענין, דלא מחזקינן איסורא לומר שנשאר בלא ששים. וכן עיקר. ואפילו לדברי האוסרין, אין הכלי שנתבשל בו נאסר, דמעמידין הכלי על חזקתו.

— רמ״א יו״ד ק״ז:א (ב״י בשם ר' שמשון)

The two streams (Shach s.k. 1). The Shach unfolds the machloket of the Rishonim: R. Baruch / Sefer HaTerumot genuinely fear that the prohibition remained last without 60 — stringent; R. Shimshon replies that one does not presume a prohibition (לא מחזקינן איסורא) where one does not see it: the prohibition is deemed to be in the majority (איסורא ברובא איתא). The Beit Yossef rules like R. Shimshon, and the Rama writes "וכן עיקר" — this is the main view.

The eggs / fish asymmetry (Taz s.k. 4; Shach s.k. 1). R. Baruch's leniency for fish holds because the few forbidden fish are nullified in the majority (יבש ביבש) of the large number. But for eggs, one does not cook twenty or thirty at once → no majority to nullify → one remains stringent (Maharshal: ביצים אסורות, דגים מותרים). The Taz disputes the analogy to the נשפך of the Terumat HaDeshen, and discusses the מין במינו / מין באינו מינו status of the mixture.

Le-ma'asse (the order of removal). The first conduct: one cools them or pours everything out at once — so the question never arises. If it has already been done hot and one by one, the main view (Rama) is lenient (לא מחזקינן איסורא), especially where the prohibition is nullified in the majority; but for eggs with no majority, many are stringent (Maharshal). Knowing whether there is a "majority," and whether one poured at once, are questions of fact — for the application to your situation, consult your Rav.

4. ביצים מול דגים — the asymmetry of ביטול ברוב

ואם נתערב אחד באחרים, אם הם דגים — בטל ברוב, דהוי יבש ביבש ; אבל בביצים, שאין מבשלין מהן הרבה כל כך, אין כאן רוב לבטל, ולכך יש להחמיר (מהרש״ל).

— ש״ך וט״ז יו״ד ק״ז:א בשם מהרש״ל (ים של שלמה)

Case	Is there a "majority" that nullifies?	Measure	Source
Small fish, one unclean found	Yes — large number, יבש ביבש	בטל ברוב — the majority nullifies the forbidden unit	R. Baruch; Shach s.k. 1
Eggs, one with chick/blood	No — one does not cook so many	No רוב → stringent (removal one by one re-forbids)	Maharshal; Taz s.k. 4
Transfer by עירוי	—	Forbids כדי קליפה (= כלי ראשון, siman 105)	Shach s.k. 1

מין במינו / מין באינו מינו (Shach s.k. 1). The Shach specifies that fish are nullified in the majority even when dry (בטלים ברוב יבש) because, among themselves, it is מין במינו; and for an unclean fish mixed with clean ones, he discusses whether one goes after the name (siman 98:2) — a detail that changes the count. This is why, in practice, one cannot mechanically transpose the leniency of fish to eggs.

Le-ma'asse (fish / eggs). For small fish in a large number, the forbidden unit tends to be nullified in the majority (יבש ביבש). For eggs, one does not rely on a majority → one is stringent, and above all one avoids removing them one by one while hot. The exact evaluation (number, מין במינו, עירוי) is not done alone — for the application to your situation, consult your Rav.

5. מעמידין הכלי על חזקתו — the utensil stays on its presumption

ואפילו לדברי האוסרין, אין הכלי שנתבשלו בו נאסר, דמעמידין הכלי על חזקתו, ואין מחזיקין בו איסור מספק.

— רמ״א יו״ד ק״ז:א ; ש״ך ס״ק ב

The utensil (Shach s.k. 2; Maharil). Even according to the stringent ones, one does not forbid the pot in which one cooked: one keeps the utensil on its presumption (חזקה), and one does not presume a prohibition out of doubt. The Shach cites the Maharil: one need not even be concerned for the utensil, except after 24 hours (and then it is a ספק דרבנן of נ״ט לפגם, hence lenient). This is an important practical leniency for pots.

דם ביצים / ציר דגים טמאים — when is it דרבנן? (Shach; Pitchei Teshuva s.k. 1)

The principle: egg blood (דם ביצים) and the brine of unclean fish (ציר דגים טמאים) are דרבנן → in case of doubt, ספק דרבנן לקולא, which reinforces the lenient side.
The decisive precision: only brine by salting (מליחה) is דרבנן; by cooking (בישול), the taste comes out fully → דאורייתא (Shach; Noda BiYhouda, cf. siman 83). This distinction weighs le-ma'asse, since siman 107 speaks precisely of cooking.

Le-ma'asse (utensil, דם/ציר). The pot in which the eggs/fish cooked does not become forbidden (חזקה; at most after 24 hours, and then it is a lenient דרבנן doubt). But the "blood/brine is דרבנן" leniency does not apply when the prohibition came out by cooking — there it is דאורייתא. Distinguishing salting from cooking, and counting the 24 hours, are questions of fact — for the application to your situation, consult your Rav.

6. הזבוב והדבר המאוס — the fly and the repulsive thing

זבוב וכיוצא בו מדברים המאוסים שנפש האדם קצה בהם, שנמצא בתבשיל — זורקו והשאר מותר, שאין פליטת דברים אלו אוסרת, דהוי נותן טעם לפגם.

— שולחן ערוך יו״ד ק״ז:ב (וע' לקמן סימן ק״ד)

The creature (seif 2). A fly (זבוב) and the like, among the repulsive things from which a person's soul recoils, found in a dish: one throws it out and the dish is permitted, for the פליטה of these spoiled things does not forbid — it is a נותן טעם לפגם (referral to siman 104, where this din is developed). The Rama: such is the widespread custom (B"Y following Rashba, Rokeach, Tur 104), and one does not change the custom.

The lenient custom, and its limits (Shach s.k. 7; Pitchei Teshuva s.k. 2). The Shach stresses that, although the Rama follows the lenient view (the Mehaber), many Rishonim and Acharonim forbid; the stringent custom yields only in הפסד מרובה (Maharam Padua, Maharshal). But the Pitchei Teshuva reports the Radbaz (HaHadashot 47): a מנהג פשוט, lenient for the fly. Major reservation: in vinegar or beer (חומץ/שכר), all forbid — for there the taste is no longer spoiled (siman 104).

Le-ma'asse (the creature). For an insect/fly fallen into an ordinary hot dish: one removes it, the dish stays permitted (נ״ט לפגם — widespread custom, especially in a loss). But in vinegar or beer, one forbids. And the attitude (lenient Sephardic vs stringent except הפסד מרובה Ashkenazi) depends on your minhag. Judging "repulsive," "spoiled," "significant loss" is a matter of fact — for the application to your situation, consult your Rav.

7. הכף — the spoon that drew out a prohibition

ואם הוציא בכף דג טמא מן הקדרה, או דבר אחר שאינו פוגם, אסור להחזיר הכף לקדרה ; ואם החזירה, צריך ס' בקדרה כנגד האיסור, ולא כנגד כל הכף.

— רמ״א יו״ד ק״ז:ב (או״ה כלל כ״ז)

The spoon drew out a non-spoiling prohibition…	Measure	Source
One did not return it to the pot	Nothing to do — returning it is forbidden	Mehaber/Rama s.2
One returned it (new wood/metal spoon)	60 against the prohibition alone — not the whole spoon (no חנ״נ for a utensil)	Rama; Shach s.k. 5
Old or earthenware (חרס) spoon	חנ״נ → 60 against the whole spoon	Shach s.k. 5 (siman 98:5)
With a little of the dish + the prohibition on the spoon	60 also against that bit of the dish (which became נבילה)	Shach s.k. 6; או״ה כ״ז

No חנ״נ for a utensil (Shach s.k. 5). When the spoon drew out the prohibition and is dipped back into it, one does not say the whole spoon became נבילה: it is a utensil, and 60 against the prohibition it absorbed suffices. Exception: an old spoon (already imbued) or one of earthenware (חרס) — there the Shach refers to siman 98:5, where one is more stringent, and counts 60 against the whole spoon.

The bit of dish that became נבילה (Shach s.k. 6). If there was, along with the prohibition, a little of the dish itself on the spoon, that bit of dish absorbed the prohibition and became נבילה on the spoon; when dipping it back, one therefore needs 60 also against that bit of dish (and not only against the bare prohibition). The Shach notes the practical difficulty: one does not know exactly how much the spoon absorbed (צ״ע).

8. כלי ראשון לחומרא — the spoon coming out hot

The spoon = כלי ראשון לחומרא (Shach s.k. 7). The spoon that comes out hot from the pot has the status of a כלי ראשון for stringency: it can exude and absorb taste like a pot on the fire. This is why dipping it back is treated stringently — hence the requirement of 60 against the prohibition (and against the bit of dish where applicable), and the prohibition of returning it לכתחילה.

הכרעה. The practical grid of seif 2 on the spoon: (1) do not return it; (2) if returned, 60 against the prohibition (new wood/metal spoon); (3) 60 against the whole spoon if it is old or earthenware (חנ״נ); (4) 60 also against the bit of dish that accompanied it. All because the hot spoon is כלי ראשון לחומרא.

Le-ma'asse (the spoon). A spoon used to draw out non-kosher food is not returned to the pot; if it was returned, one needs 60 against the prohibition (new metal/wood spoon), 60 against the whole spoon if it is old or earthenware, and 60 also against the bit of dish it carried. Recognizing the material, the age of the spoon, and the absorbed quantity 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, Yehaveh Da'at, Yalkut Yossef, Or LeTzion) extend the principles of siman 107 above to modern cases. 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 from the framework of the Mehaber and from the Rama's "וכן עיקר" on לא מחזקינן איסורא: it tends toward leniency in the doubt of נשאר באחרונה, and readily relies on ספק דרבנן (egg blood / brine by salting) as well as on ביטול ברוב for fish. On the repulsive creature, the Sephardic school retains the lenient custom (נ״ט לפגם — מנהג פשוט, Radbaz), except in vinegar / beer.

Concrete case	Sephardic orientation (to be verified)
Eggs removed one by one while hot, one with a chick	Main view: לא מחזקינן איסורא (lenient); but without a majority of eggs, many remain stringent (Maharshal). Conduct: cool / pour out at once.
An unclean fish among small fish	בטל ברוב (יבש ביבש) if large number; the utensil stays permitted (חזקה).
A fly / insect in a hot dish	One throws it out, the dish permitted (נ״ט לפגם, מנהג פשוט); but in vinegar/beer → forbidden (siman 104).
A spoon that drew out a prohibition, returned	60 against the prohibition (new spoon); the whole spoon if old/earthenware; 60 also against the bit of dish (Shach sk5-6).

Anchoring in the siman. All of this follows from the text: לא מחזקינן איסורא — וכן עיקר (seif 1, Rama), the ביטול ברוב asymmetry (Maharshal), the חזקה of the utensil, נ״ט לפגם (seif 2, siman 104), and the rule of the spoon (או״ה כלל כ״ז). The contemporary responsa apply these rules to today's kitchens.

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 (Maharshal/Yam Shel Shlomo, Chochmat Adam, Aruch HaShulchan YD). Two features dominate: (1) on eggs, the stringency of the Maharshal — no majority, hence stringent if removed one by one while hot; (2) on the creature, the stringent custom the Shach reports (many Rishonim forbid), except in הפסד מרובה; and always stringent in vinegar / beer.

Concrete case	Ashkenazi orientation (to be verified)
Eggs one by one while hot	Stringent (Maharshal: no רוב that nullifies); one cools or pours out at once לכתחילה.
לא מחזקינן איסורא	The Rama's main view ("וכן עיקר") for the general doubt; but the eggs' asymmetry limits the leniency.
Fly / creature	Rather stringent custom (Shach s.k. 7), eased in הפסד מרובה; forbidden in vinegar/beer.
Spoon returned to the pot	60 against the prohibition; the whole spoon if old/חרס; 60 also against the bit of dish (Shach sk5-6).

Chabad — only through real sources. The Shulchan Aruch HaRav does not cover Yoreh De'ah; there is therefore no "Da'at HaRav" on siman 107. 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 107 sheds light on the kitchen. Three tools of the siman serve to decide modern cases: (1) the נשאר באחרונה and its remedy (cool / pour out at once) — seif 1; (2) the creature נ״ט לפגם and its limits (vinegar/beer) — seif 2, siman 104; (3) the spoon (60 against the prohibition, no חנ״נ for a new utensil) — seif 2.

Modern case	Tool of the siman	Orientation (to be confirmed with the Rav)
Removing hard eggs one by one from a pot, one found with a chick/blood	Seif 1 (נשאר באחרונה)	Cool first or pour cold water / pour everything out at once. If already done hot one by one: main view lenient (לא מחזקינן איסורא), but eggs without a majority → many stringent (Maharshal). The utensil stays permitted (חזקה).
An insect / fly fallen into the soup	Seif 2 (נ״ט לפגם; siman 104)	One removes it, the dish stays permitted (widespread custom; Sephardim lenient, Ashkenazim more stringent except הפסד מרובה). In vinegar / beer → all forbid.
A spoon used for non-kosher food, returned to the pot	Seif 2 (the spoon)	60 against the prohibition (new metal/wood spoon); 60 against the whole spoon if old or earthenware; 60 also against the bit of dish it carried. Returning it is forbidden לכתחילה.

Le-ma'asse. These situations blend questions of fact — how many items, did one cool or pour out at once, which liquid (vinegar/beer?), which spoon material and its age, how much dish accompanied it. The practical rule: reconstruct precisely what fell, where, and what was done, then ask. 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
Cooked eggs, to be removed	Cool / pour cold water / all at once	Avoids the נשאר באחרונה without 60
Already removed one by one while hot (doubt)	Main view: לא מחזקינן איסורא (lenient)	Eggs without a majority → stringent (Maharshal)
Unclean fish among small fish	בטל ברוב (יבש ביבש)	Large number = majority (Shach s.k. 1)
The cooking pot	Permitted — מעמידין הכלי על חזקתו	At most after 24 hours, ספק דרבנן (Maharil)
Fly / repulsive creature	One throws it out, the dish permitted (נ״ט לפגם)	Vinegar / beer → forbidden (siman 104)
Spoon that drew out a prohibition, returned	60 against the prohibition alone	No חנ״נ for a new utensil (Shach s.k. 5)
Old / earthenware spoon	60 against the whole spoon (חנ״נ)	siman 98:5 (Shach s.k. 5)
A bit of dish with the prohibition on the spoon	60 also against that bit of dish	Became נבילה (Shach s.k. 6)

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

Posek	Decisive contribution (anchored in the corpus)
Mehaber (seifim 1-2)	The order of removing eggs (cool / cold water) for fear of the chick left last without 60; the fly / repulsive thing that one throws out, the dish permitted (נ״ט לפגם); the spoon one does not return.
Rama (הגה)	Poured into a dish and one is טריפה / unclean fish → יש אוסרים, but לא מחזקינן איסורא — וכן עיקר; even the stringent ones do not forbid the utensil (חזקה); the lenient custom on the fly (Tur 104); the spoon: 60 against the prohibition (not the whole spoon), 60 also against the bit of dish (או״ה כ״ז).
Shach (Siftei Kohen)	s.k. 1: the machloket ריב״א / R. Baruch / R. Shimshon; עירוי = כלי ראשון, כדי קליפה; fish בטלים ברוב יבש (מין במינו); s.k. 2: utensil permitted (24 h, Maharil); s.k. 5: no חנ״נ for a new utensil, but old/חרס → חנ״נ (98:5); s.k. 6: the bit of dish נבילה (צ״ע); s.k. 7: the spoon כלי ראשון לחומרא, and the stringent custom on the fly except הפסד מרובה.
Taz (Turei Zahav)	s.k. 1: לכתחילה only, בדיעבד permitted (like the יש מתירין); s.k. 2: pouring the boiling water also forbids if the forbidden egg is at the bottom (או״ה כ״ז); s.k. 3: in doubt whether one poured at once → stringent; s.k. 4: the two reasons for the leniency (R. Shimshon / R. Baruch), stringent for eggs (Maharshal); s.k. 5: stringent if one removes each with the same spoon; דם ביצים (siman 66).
Pri Megadim (פר״מ)	Refines the conditions of נ״ט לפגם and the כלי ראשון לחומרא status of the spoon (on the Shach / Taz of the siman).
Pitchei Teshuva (פתחי תשובה)	s.k. 1: the brine of unclean fish is דרבנן only by מליחה, not by בישול (Shach, Noda BiYhouda, siman 83); s.k. 2: מנהג פשוט lenient for the fly (Radbaz HaHadashot 47).

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 Rama's "וכן עיקר": lenient on the doubt (לא מחזקינן איסורא), rely on ביטול ברוב (fish) and on ספק דרבנן; lenient custom on the fly (נ״ט לפגם, מנהג פשוט).

Ashkenazi: Maharshal (Yam Shel Shlomo), Chochmat Adam, Aruch HaShulchan YD. They extend the Rama with the Maharshal's stringency: stringent on eggs (no majority), stringent custom on the creature except הפסד מרובה, and always stringent in vinegar / beer.

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 107: 107:1 · 107:2
Shach (Siftei Kohen): 107 s.k. 1 · 107 s.k. 5 · 107 s.k. 7
Taz (Turei Zahav): 107 s.k. 1 · 107 s.k. 4
Pitchei Teshuva: 107 s.k. 1 · 107 s.k. 2

👈 הלכה למעשה — the golden rule of this level

In substance, retain the two yesodot: the נשאר באחרונה (and its remedy: cool / pour out at once) in seif 1, and the נ״ט לפגם + the rule of the spoon in seif 2.
In practice, the Rama's main view is לא מחזקינן איסורא (lenient), but eggs are stringent for lack of a majority (Maharshal); the pot itself stays permitted (חזקה).
The creature does not forbid an ordinary dish (נ״ט לפגם), except in vinegar / beer; and a spoon returned requires 60 against the prohibition (no חנ״נ for a new utensil).
And for any real case — how many eggs, did one cool, which liquid, which spoon — halakha le-ma'asse goes through your Rav. For the application to your situation, consult your Rav.

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

~ ~ ~ ~ ~
DAAT · הרב יוסף חיים סממה
תלמיד חכם · מעביר שיעורים בהלכה ובחסידות
פסק והלכה למעשה בדין המבשל ביצים ודבר מאוס בתבשיל · סימן ק״ז · ⚖️ 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