The chatnut decree, wine hidden in pickles, and the lenient doubt — to discover and understand
יורה דעה · סימן קי״ד
דיני שכר ושאר משקין של עובדי כוכבים
🌱 Introduction Level · מתחילים
✦ ❖ ✦
A first approach to Siman 114: the 12 seifim of the Mehaber and the glosses of the Rama, the Hebrew text with a fluent English translation. Why is the beer (שכר) of a non-Jew forbidden — but only bimkom mechirato, on the spot? The role of the chatnut decree, of the kovea / arai distinction, of wine (יין נסך) hidden in pickles and preserves, of the price test, of nullification by sixty (ביטול בששים), of chanut vs chavit, of kavua vs parish, and of the lenient doubt (תלינן לקולא).
Topic: Beer and beverages of non-Jews — chatnut, hidden wine, the lenient doubt Source: שולחן ערוך יורה דעה סימן קי״ד
Compiled by: הרב יוסף חיים סממה DAAT · daattorah.com
📑 Study plan
1.The Mehaber's text: the 12 seifim, by thematic groups
2.Context: why this siman follows bishul akum (113)
5.The Shach and the Taz: who they are, a few key entries
6.The gloss of the Rama (הגה)
7.Chatnut on beverages: what the decree really forbids
8.Modern practical cases: coffee/tea/beer on a terrace, preserves, spices, lees
9.Summary and comprehension questions
1. The Mehaber's text — the 12 seifim
Siman 114 continues the rabbinic gezerot meant to limit social closeness with non-Jews. After bishul akum (Siman 113), the Mehaber (Rabbi Yossef Karo) deals here with their beverages — chiefly beer (שכר) — from the angle of the chatnut decree (the fear of intermarriage through the conviviality of a meal), and then a second axis: the suspicion of idolatrous wine (יין נסך) hidden in commercial pickles and preserves, with the whole regime of doubt. The Rama (Rabbi Moshe Isserles) adds his glosses (הגה), most often lenient by custom. Let us discover the seifim by groups.
Group A — The chatnut decree on beer (seifim 1-3)
Seif 1 — Beer is forbidden, but only bimkom mechirato
Any beer (שכר) of a non-Jew — whether of dates, figs, barley, grain or honey — is forbidden because of intermarriage (משום חתנות). But it is forbidden only at the place where it is sold (במקום מכירתו); if one brings it home and drinks it there, it is permitted, for the core of the decree is lest one dine with him (שמא יסעד אצלו). And they only forbade it when one settles down to drink (קובע עצמו) in the manner one sits to a beverage; but to enter the non-Jew's house and drink in passing, casually (דרך עראי באקראי), is permitted. Likewise, one who lodges at the non-Jew's is as in his own home. And it is permitted to send to buy beer from non-Jews in town. Gloss of the Rama:some permit beer of honey and grain, and such is the lenient custom in these lands (וכן נוהגין להקל במדינות אלו).
The central idea: beer is not forbidden because it contains a prohibited substance — its material is kosher. It is forbidden on account of conviviality: one fears that sharing a drink at his place, while seated, leads to sharing a meal, then to intermarriage. Hence three escape valves: (1) location — forbidden at his place, permitted at home; (2) manner — forbidden if one settles in, permitted in passing; and the Rama's lenient custom, permitting beer of honey and grain in our lands.
Seif 2 — Where one is lenient on wine, one is less so on beer
In a place where Israel has the custom of leniency regarding the wine of a non-Jew, even the beer is forbidden there.
An apparent paradox: one would expect a place lenient on wine to be lenient on beer too. It is the reverse. Where one is already lax on wine (the more serious), one must maintain the barrier on beer so that some limit to conviviality remains. Removing both would topple the whole chatnut decree.
Seif 3 — Apple wine and pomegranate wine: permitted everywhere
Cider (יין תפוחים), pomegranate wine and the like: it is permitted to drink them everywhere, for over a thing that is uncommon (דבר שאינו מצוי) they did not decree.
The braking principle:gezerot extend only to common realities. Cider and pomegranate wine being rare, the social risk they create is marginal — so the Sages did not decree over them. It is the same דבר שאינו מצוי reasoning found in other gezerot.
Group B — Hidden wine: the price test and exceptions (seifim 4-7)
All these beverages, as well as beer vinegar: it is forbidden to buy them from non-Jews if their price is higher than that of wine, for we fear they may have mixed wine into them (שמא עירב בהן יין) — so long as there is not sixty to nullify it. This when they sell in a shop (בחנות); but if one sees them draw it from the barrel (מן החבית), it is permitted, and we do not fear a mixture, for if he mixed wine into the barrel, it would spoil. Gloss of the Rama: and although they tend to smear the cauldrons and vessels with pig fat, there is no concern, for it is a taste that degrades (נותן טעם לפגם) and it is moreover nullified in sixty; likewise no concern if they placed these beverages in vessels that held wine; see further on, Siman 137.
The price test: we have no laboratory analysis, only a common-sense indicator — if the beverage costs more than wine, the merchant has a motive to have "cut" it with wine (and thus forbidden it). Two safeguards ease it: sixty nullifies any wine, and above all the chanut / chavit distinction: at the barrel one sees, and in any case the wine would spoil the batch — no fraud.
Pomegranate wine sold as a remedy: it is permitted to take it from the merchant even not from the barrel, even though its price is higher than that of wine, because since there is an exacting requirement (קפידא), he does not discredit himself (לא מרע נפשיה) — and likewise anything one buys from the craftsman (מן האומן): he does not debase himself (by mixing in what he ought not).
Kpeida = the demand for quality protects. When the buyer is exacting (a remedy must be a genuine, pure pomegranate wine), the seller has everything to lose by adulterating: he would ruin his reputation (לא מרע נפשיה). This logic of professional seriousness applies to any product bought from a craftsman whose identity is guaranteed.
Seif 6 — Checking for wine lees (shemarim); the maamid
One must beware, examine and investigate the beer and the honey beverage that non-Jews make today: do they put wine lees (שמרים של יין) in them?Gloss of the Rama: if such is their custom to add lees, it is forbidden to buy from them if there is not sixty in the beverage against the lees; and this provided they do not add it for the taste (לא עבידי לטעמיה), for what is added for the taste is not nullified even in a thousand (אפילו באלף לא בטיל); see above, Siman 123.
דבר המעמיד / עביד לטעמיה — Something added for its effect (to give taste, to set a product) is never nullified, even in a thousand times its volume — for it is not an "accident" to be drowned, it is the very reason for the mixture. If wine lees are only an unintended residue, they are nullified in sixty; if added for the taste, they are not nullified.
Seif 7 — Oil and honey: no bishul akum, no giulei akum
The oil and honey of a non-Jew are permitted: they are forbidden neither on account of bishul akum (cooking by a non-Jew) nor on account of giulei akum (flavor absorbed by their vessels). The same applies to their hot water.
Why this double exemption? Bishul akum applies only to a dish "fit for a king's table" and not eaten raw — yet oil and honey are eaten raw. And giulei akum (the vessels' taste) does not bite: residual fat degrades the oil (taam lifgam, Taz). The same logic for their hot water, a mere heated liquid.
Group C — Pickles, preserves and the doubt (seifim 8-10)
Seif 8 — Pickled capers, leeks, olives: min ha'otzar vs bechanut
The non-Jews' pickled capers, leeks (קפלוטות) and locusts (כבושים) are permitted, provided one sees that they draw them from the storehouse (מן האוצר); but those sold in a shop are forbidden, lest one have sprinkled wine upon them (שמא זילף עליהם יין). Likewise their pickled olives are permitted, even very soft, to the point the pit slips out, and we do not fear wine sprinkling — provided they were not cut with their knife. Gloss of the Rama: for being pungent (חריפים) foods, they absorb from the knife; but if they were pickled in water, they are permitted, for the water has already nullified their pungency (חריפות); and so in every similar case. See above, Siman 96.
Two distinct suspicions: (1) wine sprinkling on the pickle in a shop (at the storehouse one sees the raw product → permitted); (2) cutting with the non-Jew's knife: a charif (pungent) food "bites" and absorbs the knife's taste. The Rama's remedy: pickled in water, the pungency is already neutralized — so even cut, no problem.
Seif 9 — The permitted foods (no custom of adding wine)
The non-Jews' grapes — even very moist to the point of dripping — are permitted; likewise all pickles in which there is no custom of adding wine or vinegar; likewise tarit (meaning: slices of a large fish called tonina in the vernacular) that is not chopped (שאינה טרופה); likewise fish brine containing kulkhit (a small pure fish, a sign of purity); and likewise the leaf of chiltit (asafoetida) — permitted.
The dividing line: permitted is anything where there is no custom of adding wine, or whose form guarantees its identity — a large fish in whole slices (recognizably pure), a brine marked by a pure fish (kulkhit). Seif 10 will, point by point, take the opposite: the indistinct forms (chopped, mixed) that revive the suspicion.
Seif 10 — The heart of the doubt: talinan lekula, rova, kavua
It is forbidden to buy from non-Jews: a fragment of chiltit (asafoetida), chopped tarit (טרופה), and chilak — that is, small mixed fish, because non-kosher fish mix in with them and one cannot separate them. And pickles into which wine is sometimes put: this is to forbid them for consumption, but for benefit (בהנאה) it is permitted; and if it is known that all put wine in, they are forbidden even for benefit. Gloss of the Rama: one sells the whole, minus the value of the yayin nesech in it. And if it is known that one non-Jew in town does not mix wine, even though the others customarily do, it is permitted to buy from all so long as it is not known with certainty that they mixed it in, for we lean toward leniency (תלינן לקולא): perhaps they did not — and so in every similar case in rabbinic prohibitions (איסורי דרבנן). And if it is known that some non-Jews certainly add wine and some certainly do not, we follow the majority (בתר רובא), for "whatever separates, separates from the majority" (כל דפריש מרובא פריש); but it is forbidden to buy from them at their homes (בבתיהם), for whatever is fixed is reckoned as half-and-half (כל קבוע כמחצה על מחצה דמי).
The logical treasure of the siman: facing the doubt "is there wine?", three tools. (1) Talinan lekula: in a rabbinic prohibition, it suffices that one reliable non-Jew exist in town for one to buy from all, lacking certainty. (2) Rov / kol deparish merova parish: what is taken "at random" is deemed to come from the majority. (3) Kavua: but to go buy at his home is to remove a product from its fixed place — there one no longer follows the rov, it is half-and-half (mechtza al mechtza).
The muryas (meaning: fish sauce/fat, garum): in a place where they customarily put wine into it, it is forbidden; but if the wine is dearer than the garum, it is permitted (no one would then put wine into it); and in a place where they do not customarily put wine into it, it is permitted to buy it from non-Jews, as well as to deposit it with them and have it transported by them.
The price test, again — but reversed: for garum, it is when the wine is dearer than the sauce that one is lenient: no sensible merchant would "spoil" his sauce with a costlier product. Everything depends on local custom: where none is added, one may even deposit it with them and have them transport it.
Seif 12 — The Rashba kept away from saffron (karkom)
The Rashba kept away from saffron (כרכום), because in all that land they would sprinkle much wine upon it, and also mixed into it threads of dried meat (חוטי בשר יבש).
The final seif gives a living testimony: the Rashba (one of the greatest Rishonim) personally abstained from the saffron of his day, because of a double local adulteration — sprinkled wine and threads of dried meat. A cross-cutting lesson: compound spices, by their opacity, call for particular vigilance — hence today's need for certification on spices.
2. Context — where this siman sits
Siman 113 dealt with bishul akum (cooking by a non-Jew), a decree likewise meant to limit social closeness. Siman 114 moves from the cooked dish to the beverage: the same fear of chatnut (intermarriage through conviviality) applies to beer. But the siman has a very different second axis: the suspicion of yayin nesech (idolatrous wine) hidden in commercial products — pickles, preserves, sauces, spices — which opens the whole regime of doubt (price, bitul, rov, kavua, talinan lekula).
The siman's big questions
Question
Where?
Typical answer
Beer (שכר) and chatnut
Seifim 1-3
Forbidden bimkom mechirato if one is kovea; permitted at home / arai; Rama lenient
Hidden wine and the price test
Seif 4
Forbidden if dearer than wine (unless 60, unless min hechavit)
The craftsman's kpeida
Seif 5
Lo mara nafshei: what one buys from a craftsman is reliable
Wine lees (shemarim)
Seif 6
60 if residue; never nullified if avid letaamei
Pickles, preserves, the doubt
Seifim 8-10
Min ha'otzar ✔ / chanut ✖; talinan lekula, rov, kavua
Garum and saffron
Seifim 11-12
Local custom + price test; the Rashba kept away from saffron
The cross-cutting idea: the siman crosses two prohibitions of opposite nature. On beer, the product is kosher but the social setting is forbidden (chatnut) — one plays on place and manner. On preserves, the setting is neutral but the product may hide wine (yayin nesech) — one plays on the tools of doubt.
3. The key concepts of this siman
To understand Siman 114, one must master a small vocabulary describing, on one side, the social decree on beverages and, on the other, the tools of doubt over hidden wine.
גזרת חתנות — The "intermarriage" decree: the Sages forbade certain forms of conviviality (wine, beer, cooked dishes) because they bring people socially close and could lead to forbidden unions. This is the reason for the beer prohibition (seif 1), not a defect of the product.
במקום מכירתו — "At the place of its sale": beer is forbidden only where one drinks it at his place (the tavern, his house); brought and drunk at one's own home, it is permitted — for the issue is not to sit down to a meal at the non-Jew's (שמא יסעד אצלו).
קובע / עראי — Settling in / in passing: one forbids only the one who kovea atzmo (sits down to drink); drinking derech arai be'akrai (casually, standing, in passing) is permitted. It is all in the manner.
יין נסך / סתם יינם — Idolatrous wine: a non-Jew's wine, forbidden for consumption and benefit (yayin nesech in the strict sense) or rabbinically forbidden (stam yeinam). It is what one suspects hidden in pickles, sauces and spices (seifim 4, 10-12).
ביטול בששים — Nullification by sixty: a prohibition is nullified when drowned in sixty times its volume. Decisive for any wine possibly mixed in (seif 4) and for residual wine lees (seif 6) — unless added for the taste.
חנות / מן החבית — Shop / at the barrel: in a shop one does not see → suspicion; at the barrel one sees the raw product, and in any case the wine would spoil the batch → permitted (seif 4).
קבוע / פריש — Fixed / separated: כל דפריש מרובא פריש — what is taken "at random" follows the majority (so permitted if the majority is reliable); but כל קבוע כמחצה על מחצה — bought on the spot, at his place, the item stays "fixed" and one no longer follows the rov (seif 10).
תלינן לקולא — "We lean toward leniency": in a rabbinic prohibition (issurei derabbanan), so long as a real possibility of permission remains (even one reliable non-Jew in town), one does not forbid for lack of certainty (seif 10).
Two cross-cutting notions:נותן טעם לפגם ("a taste that degrades") — pig fat on the vessels does no harm, for it spoils and is nullified in 60 (seif 4); and קפידא → לא מרע נפשיה — the craftsman does not discredit himself on a product where the buyer is exacting (seif 5).
4. The doubt over hidden wine — the table
The whole of seif 10 (and seifim 4, 8, 11) sums up in a table of the tools of doubt. One crosses where does one buy? with what is known of local custom?, and looks at the status.
Situation
Tool
Result
Bought at the storehouse / barrel (min ha'otzar / min hechavit)
One sees the raw product
🟢 Permitted (no fraud possible)
Bought in a shop (chanut), dearer than wine
Price test
🔴 Forbidden (suspicion of mixture), unless 60
One reliable non-Jew in town (rabbinic prohibition)
Talinan lekula
🟢 Permitted to buy from all (lacking certainty)
Majority reliable, taken "at random" (parish)
Kol deparish merova parish
🟢 One follows the rov
Bought at his home (kavua)
Kol kavua kemechtza al mechtza
🔴 One no longer follows the rov (half-and-half)
Product chopped / mixed (terufa, chilak)
Inseparable from the non-kosher
🔴 Forbidden (consumption), benefit per the case
The logic in one sentence: the more one sees and the more identifiable the product (at the barrel, a whole large fish, marked by a pure fish), the more one permits; the more opaque it is (shop, chopped, mixed, at his home), the more the doubt bites. And in a rabbinic prohibition, the doubt itself leans toward leniency.
The delicate point (seif 10): do not confuse פריש and קבוע. To take a product already out of its maker's place → one follows the majority. To go fetch it at the maker's place itself → the item is "fixed" at its source and one no longer relies on the rov.
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. These are the reference nossei kelim on 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 Taz
Taz s.k. 2 — Why bread is stricter than beer
The Taz (s.k. 2) asks why the bread of a non-Jew is subject to a broader decree than the beer of this siman. He answers that bread is the staple food — על הפת יחיה האדם ("by bread man lives") — and belongs to a more everyday domestic commerce: the fear of chatnut is therefore stronger. Beer, a more occasional beverage, is forbidden only in the precise frame of seif 1 (bimkom mechirato, kovea). The Taz (s.k. 4) also poses the great question of the pilpul: why require sixty against the wine, when Siman 134 teaches that wine in water is nullified already in six (שישה)?
A key entry of the Shach
Shach s.k. 1 — No bishul akum on beer
The Shach (s.k. 1) explains, on seif 1, that beer is not subject to bishul akum (cooking by a non-Jew) — for two reasons: (a) it is not a dish שעולה על שלחן מלכים ("that rises to the table of kings"); (b) the grain is nullified in the water (תבואה בטלה לגבי המים), as one recites over it the blessing shehakol and not borei peri ha'adama. Beer's prohibition is therefore solely that of chatnut, not of bishul.
One sees the method: the Shach and the Taz do not repeat the Mehaber — they locate the prohibition (chatnut, not bishul, Shach) and set out the tensions (60 or 6 against the wine, Taz s.k. 4). This is exactly what is deepened at the Lamdan level, with the Pitchei Teshuva's debate over coffee (קאווי) and the question of bitul beshisha.
6. The gloss of the Rama (הגה)
The Rama (Rabbi Moshe Isserles) adds to the Mehaber's text glosses reflecting Ashkenazi custom — here, most often, lenient ones. Here are his most notable interventions in our siman.
On seif 1 — the lenient custom on honey and grain beer
Gloss of the Rama: ויש מתירין בשכר של דבש ותבואה וכן נוהגין להקל במדינות אלו — "some permit beer of honey and grain, and such is the lenient custom in these lands." This is the practical softening of seif 1: where the Mehaber forbids bimkom mechirato, the Rama records a widespread custom of permitting these beers.
On seif 4 — pig fat and wine vessels: no concern
Gloss of the Rama: ואע״פ שרגילים למשוח היורות והכלים בשומן חזיר אין לחוש דהוי נתינת טעם לפגם גם בטל בס׳ — "although they smear the cauldrons with pig fat, there is no concern: it is a taste that degrades (taam lifgam) and it is nullified in sixty"; likewise for vessels that held wine. The Rama thus dismisses two false concerns, referring to Siman 137.
On seif 6 — wine lees (shemarim) added for the taste
Gloss of the Rama: ואם דרכן ליתן בו שמרים אסור… אם אין במשקה ששים… והוא דלא עבידי לטעמיה דלטעמיה אפילו באלף לא בטיל — "if their custom is to add lees, it is forbidden lacking sixty… provided it is not added for the taste, for what is for the taste is not nullified even in a thousand." The decisive distinction: residue (60) vs. an intentional agent (never nullified).
On seif 8 and seif 10 — charifut, talinan lekula, rov and kavua
The Rama further specifies: a charif food cut with the non-Jew's knife absorbs its taste — unless it was pickled in water, which nullifies the pungency (seif 8); and he unfolds the whole regime of doubt (seif 10): one sells the product minus the value of the yayin nesech; talinan lekula in rabbinic prohibitions (one reliable non-Jew suffices); one follows the rov for what is taken at random (parish), but a purchase at his place (kavua) is half-and-half.
The Rama, in this siman, is broadly lenient: he records the custom of permitting certain beers, dismisses pig fat and wine vessels (taam lifgam, 60), and opens the doubt widely (talinan lekula for rabbinic prohibitions) — while keeping clear limits (lees added for the taste, a kavua purchase at his home).
7. Chatnut on beverages — what the decree really forbids
Seifim 1-2 — the heart of the first axis — deserve a pause. What exactly does the beer prohibition target, when the product is itself not forbidden?
Everything rests on a distinction of setting, not of substance. The beer is kosher; what is feared is sitting to a meal at the non-Jew's. Hence two variables:
Place (bimkom mechirato): forbidden at his place, permitted brought home — and one who lodges with him is as at home.
Manner (kovea / arai): forbidden if one settles down to drink, permitted in passing, casually.
Case
Status
Why
Beer drunk at the non-Jew's, while seated
🔴 Forbidden
Bimkom mechirato + kovea (shema yisad etzlo)
Beer brought and drunk at home
🟢 Permitted
No social setting at his place
Beer drunk in passing (arai) at his place
🟢 Permitted
No kevius → no fear of a meal
Beer of honey / grain (Rama's custom)
🟢 Permitted (custom)
Vechen nohagin lehakel bimdinot elu
Place lenient on wine
🔴 Beer forbidden
To maintain a barrier (seif 2)
Seif 3 adds the final touch: cider and pomegranate wine, being uncommon (דבר שאינו מצוי), escape any decree — proof that the prohibition rests only on the social frequency of the beverage, not on its nature.
8. Modern practical cases
How do these rules apply today? Here are four common situations illuminated by our siman.
Case 1 — Coffee, tea or beer on a terrace at the non-Jew's
Seif 1 targets our beverages directly: coffee (קאווי), tea, beer, sodas. The question is manner: settling in to drink at the non-Jew's (kevius) belongs to the forbidden setting; drinking in passing (arai) is permitted; bringing it home is permitted. The Rama moreover records the lenient custom on these beverages. The Pitchei Teshuva (s.k. 1) explicitly discusses coffee (קאווי): the Maharit permits it like beer, the Panim Meirot (his grandfather) objects — a debate directly applicable to our coffees. For the application to your situation, consult your Rav.
Case 2 — Industrial preserves and pickles
Olives, gherkins, capers, marinated fish, garum-type sauces, vinegars (seifim 4, 8-11): the historic fear is the addition of wine (יין נסך). The price test has become theoretical, but the principle stays alive through certification (hekhsher), which plays the role of "seeing it drawn from the barrel" (min hechavit) and of monitoring the custom. The logics of rov and kavua still illuminate the status of a product bought in a store vs. ordered directly from the producer. For the application to your situation, consult your Rav.
Case 3 — Spices: saffron, asafoetida, blends
Seif 12 (the Rashba keeping away from saffron/karkom) and seif 10 (the fragment of chiltit) target compound spices: opacity, threads of dried meat, cutting with a charif knife. Hence the need for a hekhsher on compound spices and blends, where a raw, identifiable spice raises less of a question. For the application to your situation, consult your Rav.
Case 4 — Lees and oenological additives (shemarim)
Seif 6 targets the additives of fermented beverages (wine lees, clarifying agents). The criterion is: a mere residue → nullified in sixty; but an agent added for its effect (avid letaamei / davar hamaamid) → never nullified (אפילו באלף לא בטיל). In the era of oenological additives of doubtful origin, this criterion remains very operative. For the application to your situation, consult your Rav.
The thread of the four cases: for beer and beverages, ask the question of the setting (at his place / at home, seated / in passing); for preserves, spices and additives, ask the question of hidden wine (local custom, certification, residue or intentional agent). But the concrete decision always belongs to the Rav, who knows the factual details.
9. Summary of Siman 114
The essentials of Siman 114 in a few sentences:
The non-Jew's beer (שכר) is forbidden because of chatnut, but only bimkom mechirato and if one is kovea; permitted at home, in passing (arai), and if one lodges with him (seif 1).
The Rama permits beer of honey and grain — lenient custom in our lands (seif 1).
Where one is lenient on wine, one keeps the prohibition on beer (seif 2); cider and pomegranate wine, being uncommon, are permitted everywhere (seif 3).
The price test: forbidden if dearer than wine (unless 60), but permitted min hechavit; pig fat → taam lifgam + 60 (seif 4).
The craftsman's kpeida makes him reliable (lo mara nafshei, seif 5); the wine lees: 60 if residue, never if avid letaamei (seif 6).
Oil and honey permitted (no bishul, no giulei akum), as is their hot water (seif 7).
Pickles: permitted min ha'otzar, forbidden bechanut (wine sprinkling); a charif knife → absorbs, unless pickled in water (seif 8).
Permitted is all without a custom of adding wine (grapes, whole tarit, kulkhit, chiltit leaf, seif 9); forbidden the chopped/mixed and pickles with wine — talinan lekula, rov, kavua (seif 10).
The garum (muryas) per local custom and price (seif 11); the Rashba kept away from saffron (karkom) — sprinkled wine and meat threads (seif 12).
Memory table
Situation
Status
Beer drunk while seated at the non-Jew's
🔴 Forbidden (chatnut, bimkom mechirato)
Beer brought home / drunk in passing
🟢 Permitted
Beverage dearer than wine, in a shop
🔴 Forbidden (unless 60, unless min hechavit)
Wine lees added for the taste (avid letaamei)
🔴 Never nullified (even in a thousand)
Pickle bought min ha'otzar
🟢 Permitted
One reliable non-Jew in town (rabbinic prohibition)
🟢 Permitted to buy from all (talinan lekula)
Purchase at his home (kavua)
🔴 One no longer follows the rov (half-and-half)
Comprehension questions
Check your understanding:
Why is the non-Jew's beer (שכר) forbidden, even though the product is kosher (seif 1)? What does משום חתנות mean?
What is במקום מכירתו? And the קובע / עראי distinction?
What does the Rama rule on honey and grain beer (seif 1)?
Why, where one is lenient on wine, does beer stay forbidden (seif 2)? And why is cider permitted everywhere (seif 3)?
Explain the price test (seif 4). What does the חנות / מן החבית distinction change?
What is the craftsman's קפידא (seif 5)? And the difference between residual lees and lees עביד לטעמיה (seif 6)?
Why do oil and honey escape bishul akum and giulei akum (seif 7)?
Distinguish מן האוצר and בחנות for pickles (seif 8). What does cutting with a charif knife change?
Explain תלינן לקולא, כל דפריש מרובא פריש and כל קבוע כמחצה על מחצה (seif 10).
What does the Taz say (s.k. 2 and s.k. 4)? And the Shach (s.k. 1) on beer and bishul akum?
To go further
If you wish to deepen this siman:
📚 Level 2 — Lamdan: the pilpul, the yesod of the chatnut decree on beverages, the Taz's great question (60 or 6 against the wine, Siman 134), the Pitchei Teshuva's debate over coffee (קאווי), and the kavua / parish regime grounded in the Avoda Zara sugyot
✨ Level 3 — Synthesis: the comparative tables (bimkom mechirato / at home, chanut / chavit, rov / kavua), the rules of thumb and quick memorization of the 12 seifim
⚖️ Level 4 — Halakha lema'asseh: the practical ruling (Beit Yossef, Rama, Taz, Shach, Pri Hadash, Pitchei Teshuva) and contemporary poskim on the concrete cases
The sources for this level can be consulted on Sefaria: