From the ruling of the Mehaber and the Rama, through the arbitration of the Taz, the Shach,
the Pitchei Teshuva and the Rambam, down to the bottle standing on our table
Subject:
שולחן ערוך יורה דעה סימן קכ״ה (י״א סעיפים)
עם נושאי הכלים: ט״ז, ש״ך, פתחי תשובה, רמב״ם
⚠ Level warning:
This level is not “Daat HaRav”: the Shulchan Arukh HaRav
(the Alter Rebbe) does not cover Yoreh De'ah, and therefore not Siman 125.
This is a level of practical psika: what one does, and whom one asks.
Written and studied by:
הרב יוסף חיים סממה · DAAT
How to read this level. Every statement here is anchored either in the language of the Shulchan Arukh and its nossei kelim (Taz, Shach, Pitchei Teshuva), or in a named and checkable posek (Rambam, Gemara Avodah Zarah). In Yoreh De'ah there is no Mishna Berura (which comments only on Orach Chaim) and no Shulchan Arukh HaRav / Daat HaRav (the Alter Rebbe did not write Yoreh De'ah). The Arukh HaShulchan is not cited here: his text on this siman is not accessible to us, and one does not quote what one cannot verify. Siman 125 is short — eleven seifim — yet it governs very concrete situations, and above all mechanical ones: a tap, a pump, a dosing device, a moving arm. Where the question runs past the siman, this level says so and stops: halakha le-ma'asse goes through your Rav.
דין יין הבא מכח עובד כוכבים וכח כחו. ובו י״א סעיפים:
נטל עובד כוכבים כלי של יין והגביהו ויצא היין אף על פי שלא שכשך נאסר בשתייה שהרי היין בא מכחו ומה שנשאר בכלי אסור גם כן משום נצוק. (וי״א דלא אסרינן נצוק בכח עובד כוכבים) (טור והרא״ש ומרדכי ור״ן בשם רש״י ותוספות וראב״ן ותשובת מיי׳ המ״א סימן י״א) (ומכל מקום יש להחמיר אם לא בהפסד מרובה כדלקמן סימן קכ״ו) ואם הוא שלא בכוונה שלא ידע שהוא יין (או שלא הגביה הכלי) (בית יוסף סימן קכ״ד) הכל מותר אפי׳ בשתייה:
The founding case. A non-Jew took a vessel of wine, lifted it, and the wine came out. He did not stir the wine and he did not touch it — and nevertheless the wine is forbidden to drink, because it came from his force (מכחו). What remains in the vessel is forbidden as well, on account of nitzok, the stream that links what pours out to what stays behind.
The two glosses of the Rama. First a disagreement: some hold that there is no nitzok for the mere force of a non-Jew — and yet one should be strict, except where the loss would be great (see siman 126). Then a limit: if the act was unintentional — he did not know it was wine, or he did not lift the vessel — everything is permitted, even to drink.
— Shulchan Arukh, Yoreh De'ah 125:1 · Sefaria YD 125:1
Two readings run through the nossei kelim. (a) Koaḥ would be a kind of mediate touch: he touched the wine through the vessel. That is the reading the Bach offers for the case of the spigot, and the Shach rejects it with three arguments (ש״ך יו״ד קכ״ה ס״ק ג). (b) Koaḥ would be a prohibition of its own, a rabbinic safeguard — לך לך אמרינן נזירא — independent of any touching; that is how the Taz reads Rashi on our daf (ט״ז יו״ד קכ״ה ס״ק א). The decisive nafka mina: is lifting required for koaḥ? On reading (a) presumably yes; on reading (b) certainly not — and that is the view the Taz and the Shach impose on seif 1, against the gloss of the Rama.
Siman 125 has eleven seifim — that is the count announced by the heading (ובו י״א סעיפים) and it is the actual count of the text. The Mehaber carries the whole siman; the Rama glosses twice only, at seif 1 and at seif 4, plus one short addition at seif 10. Here is the overall map, as it emerges from the text itself.
| Seif | Subject | Ruling (anchored in the text) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | the founding case | He lifts a vessel and the wine comes out, without stirring or touching: forbidden to drink, since it came from his force; what remains is forbidden משום נצוק. Rama: some do not apply nitzok to the mere force of a non-Jew — yet one should be strict, except where the loss is great (siman 126). And if it was unintentional — he did not know it was wine, or he did not lift the vessel — everything is permitted, even to drink. |
| 2 | כח כחו | The force of his force is like his force. But the force of the force of his force — for instance the beam of the winepress that he set turning, where three forces are at work: the boards, the wheel and the beam — is permitted bediavad, even to drink. |
| 3 | mixed force | The force of the Jew and the force of the non-Jew mixed together — both poured at once: permitted bediavad, and even if the non-Jew could have poured alone without the Jew's help. Provided the Jew who helps is an adult; a young child does not count, since he is a מסייע שאין בו ממש. |
| 4 | the wine already flowing | The wine already streams from the barrel into the tub and the non-Jew lifts the cart so that the stream runs better: permitted. Rama: but if it would not have flowed without that lifting — forbidden; likewise if a Jew is decanting and a non-Jew jogs his hand: was it flowing anyway? permitted; if not, forbidden. And a non-Jew unloading a barrel who causes wine to come out from his force: permitted, since it is unintentional — במלאכתו הוא עוסק. |
| 5 | a thrown object | He threw a stone or an object into the wine: permitted even to drink. But if the object rolls and he pushes it until it falls into the wine: forbidden even for benefit. And if he did so in anger: permitted even to drink. |
| 6 | grapes thrown into the press | He brings grapes in baskets and in small vats and throws them into a press that holds trodden wine: permitted bediavad, even though there is in the vats wine that seeped from the grapes. And if a Jew helps him throw them in: permitted even lekhatchila. |
| 7 | water poured into wine | He threw water into the wine: permitted even to drink, provided he does not aim to dilute it (מזיגה) — for instance he threw water into large barrels, or into a cup without knowing it was wine. But if he aims at mezigah: forbidden to drink. If his intent is unknown: permitted. |
| 8 | decanting | The non-Jew pours from a vessel in his hand into one held by a Jew: what comes out is forbidden to drink. The Jew pours from his vessel into one held by a non-Jew: permitted even to drink — but if the non-Jew shook the vessel, the wine is forbidden. |
| 9 | a skin carried | He carried a skin of wine from place to place, holding its mouth closed in his hand: full or partly empty, permitted — even though the wine sloshes, since אין דרך ניסוך בכך. |
| 10 | an open vessel carried | He carries an open vessel with a Jew walking behind him: partly empty and unshaken — permitted to drink (וי״א even if shaken, וכן עיקר); full — forbidden for benefit, lest he touched it. If the Jew walks at his side and watches him, even full — permitted. Carried by two on a pole, or a bucket carried by its ring — permitted even when full. Rama: provided the Jew helped pass the pole through the ring, or saw it done. |
| 11 | a barrel carried | A non-Jew carrying a barrel, even on his shoulder, and while walking wine comes out unintentionally: permitted to drink, including what came out — for on כחו שלא בכוונה the Sages issued no decree. |
At seif 1 the Rama adds a parenthesis drawn from the Beit Yosef: if the non-Jew did not lift the vessel — he only tilted it — everything is permitted. Both nossei kelim of the siman reject that gloss, and they do so at length. The Shach opens with צ״ע בדין זה and proves from the Ramban, from Tosafot and from the Mordechai that tilting is enough (ש״ך יו״ד קכ״ה ס״ק ג). The Taz closes his first note, the longest in the siman, leaving no way out:
« ואין להקל כלל כאן בכח עובד כוכבים אפי׳ בלא הגבהה דמ״מ כח עובד כוכבים יש כאן »
— ט״ז יו״ד קכ״ה ס״ק א
Le-ma'asse (the act upon the bottle). Three reflexes. (1) A non-Jew who moves a sealed bottle raises no question at all: that is seif 9 and רמב״ם הלכות מאכלות אסורות פרק י״ב הלכה ד, below. (2) A non-Jew who pours, who opens a tap, or who tilts a bottle so that the wine runs, brings wine out by his force. (3) “He did not lift it, he only tipped it” is not an answer, the Taz and the Shach having set it aside. Even so the practical conclusion turns on two further facts — is the wine mevushal, and was the act intentional? — treated in sections 7 and 10. For the application to your situation, ask your Rav.
« דבהפסד מרובה אפי׳ בניצוק גמור דהיינו ליין הנאסר במגע עובד כוכבים אנו מקילין »
— ט״ז יו״ד קכ״ה ס״ק ד
« ולדידן הכל שרי במקום הפסד »
— ש״ך יו״ד קכ״ה ס״ק א
Le-ma'asse (the opened bottle). What the siman establishes clearly is that the question of the glass poured and the question of the bottle left are two distinct questions, and that the second is lighter than the first. What it does not establish is the threshold of a “great loss”, nor the law of an expensive bottle, a cask, a whole vat. That is exactly the kind of question that goes to a Rav, not to a table.
« אבל לכתחלה אסור אפילו בעשרה כחות ויותר »
— ש״ך יו״ד קכ״ה ס״ק ד
A beam press is a mechanism, and the siman treats it as one: it counts its organs. The temptation is strong to apply the same count to a pump, a dispenser, an electric doser, an electronically controlled tap. But the count in the seif assumes that the links are visible and countable, and that the initial force is a man's own. In a modern appliance the force that moves the wine is not his at all: it comes from the motor, and his act is only a trigger. The siman says nothing about that case — neither to forbid nor to permit — and the neighbouring categories one would have to summon (גרמא, כח שני, indirect action) are not present here. This level stops here: that is a question for a posek, not a deduction.
Le-ma'asse (mechanisms, pumps, automatic taps). Take from the siman what it actually gives: lekhatchila one does not arrange the thing — the Shach writes it for ten forces as for three; and bediavad, the number of links is a recognised criterion, but its application to a motor, a solenoid valve or a racking system is written nowhere in this siman. A winery installation, a bar dispenser, the tap of a cask operated by a non-Jewish employee: these are questions to be asked as they stand, with an exact description of the mechanism. Ask your Rav.
The Shach extends the heter one step: even if the Jew alone could not have done it, it is permitted bediavad — so the Rashba in Torat HaBayit and so the Ran; and the Darkhei Moshe distinguishes it from the case of the child, where it is evident that the non-Jew does the essential part (ש״ך יו״ד קכ״ה ס״ק ו). The Taz explains the logic: even though the non-Jew has the greater strength, once the Jew also bears part of the load, who will tell us that within the force needed the non-Jew's share is the larger? (ט״ז יו״ד קכ״ה ס״ק ו). Yet both bound the heter in the very same way:
« אבל לכתחלה אסור אפילו הישראל יכול והעובד כוכבים אינו יכול »
— ש״ך יו״ד קכ״ה ס״ק ה
« וכל זה דוקא בדיעבד אבל לכתחלה אסור »
— ט״ז יו״ד קכ״ה ס״ק ו
« כיון דבלא״ה היה נמי היין מקלח ולא הועיל מעשה העובד כוכבים אלא שעי״כ מקלח יותר יפה א״כ מותר דהוי מסייע שאין בו ממש »
— ש״ך יו״ד קכ״ה ס״ק ז
Le-ma'asse (intent). Three situations are clearly distinct. (1) He did not know it was wine: seif 1 permits, even for drinking. (2) He was busy at his task — a courier, a porter, an employee stacking crates: seif 4 permits. (3) He knowingly poured wine: that is the full case of the siman, and there the gloss of the Rama and the position of the Mehaber part ways. Knowing which situation you are in, and which psika you follow, is not a matter of text but of community and circumstance. Ask your Rav.
The Taz brings from the Beit Yosef two readings of the Rosh. On the first, the reason is lest he touched: we fear he touched the wine with his hand. On the second, this is an intentional touch by means of an object, forbidden even for benefit. The nafka mina bears on us directly, says the Taz: since we are lenient about touch by means of an object (siman 124), on the second reading nothing would be forbidden today, whereas on the first the prohibition stands. His conclusion is an explicit stringency, valid even in our era:
« ועל כן נראה דיש לחוש לפירוש הראשון ולאסור אף לדידן בזורק שלא בחמתו והחפץ מתגלגל ודוחהו עד היין כל שלא ברור שלא נגע ביד »
— ט״ז יו״ד קכ״ה ס״ק ז
« ולכתחלה אסור אטו שפיכת יין גמור »
— ש״ך יו״ד קכ״ה ס״ק ט
The Ran forbade in a cup even for a little water, because habits of mezigah vary from man to man. The Shach bounds that stringency by a statement of fact about his country and his time:
« ונראה דבארצות האלו שאין דרך למזוג בכוס שרי אא״כ ידוע שכוונתו היתה למזיגה »
— ש״ך יו״ד קכ״ה ס״ק י״א
Le-ma'asse (water, ice, a carafe). The siman gives the criterion — does he aim to dilute the wine? — and doubt leans toward leniency (ואם אינו ידוע אם כוון למזיגה אם לאו מותר). The Shach adds that where diluting wine is not the custom, the act is permitted unless the intent is known. Even so, “adding water”, “adding ice”, “filling a carafe” and “lengthening a drink” are not necessarily one and the same act. Ask your Rav.
The Taz devotes his twelfth note to one who brings his vessel toward the stream — the מצדד אצדודי, as he reads the Gemara — and sets out three positions: the Rambam, for whom stirring forbids even without lifting; the Rosh, who requires lifting, save here where the act shows his intent — דמוכח שעושה כדי שהיין יתקבל מכח; and the Rashba with the Raavad, for whom this is a touch by way of the wall of the vessel. He concludes that for us, who are lenient about mediate touch, none of the three forbids — and the Pitchei Teshuva adds at once that according to the Noda BiYehuda (תניינא יו״ד סימן ע׳) this conclusion of the Taz does not hold against every opinion (פתחי תשובה יו״ד קכ״ה ס״ק א).
Le-ma'asse (delivery, service, transport). The division of the siman is sharp and it transfers well: sealed, closed, corked — no question (seif 9); open and carried — the question is that of the hand, and the answer is watching (seif 10); poured — that is the question of koaḥ (seif 8). What the siman does not say: the law of a screw cap reopened, of a crown cap, of a seal broken and put back, of wine in a bag-in-box or in a pressurised cask. Ask your Rav.
What the siman does not say about mevushal. The threshold of siman 123 is a threshold of boiling upon the fire. Today's industrial processes — low pasteurisation, flash pasteurisation, in-line heat treatment, a “mevushal” mention on a label — are not described in the siman, and contemporary poskim do not all treat them alike. Whether a given wine carries the status of mevushal is a question of certification and of psak, not one this level can settle.
| Question | The position, with its source |
|---|---|
| The language of the Mehaber | Intentional koaḥ forbids drinking (שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:א); what remains is forbidden משום נצוק; unintentional koaḥ is wholly permitted (seif 11). The Mehaber does not carry the gloss of siman 124 about our era: Sephardic psika starts from this language as it stands. |
| The gloss of the Rama | At siman 124 seif 24: today every touch of a non-Jew is deemed unintentional — whence the repeated leniencies of the Shach and the Taz in our siman. This is the footing of Ashkenazi psika on these seifim. |
| The Shach | Three times in the siman: note 1 (nitzok — permitted where there is loss), note 2 (the koaḥ of seif 1 — permitted for us even where the loss is not great, the Rama having spoken only מן הדין), note 22 (the dripping barrel — ולדידן פשוט דשרי). |
| The Taz | Lenient at note 12 on the מצדד אצדודי, but strict at note 1 (no heter for the absence of lifting) and at note 7 (the pushed object stays forbidden even for us, so long as it is not certain that he did not touch with his hand). |
| The Pitchei Teshuva | A single note on the whole siman, on the ואם נדנד of seif 8: according to the Noda BiYehuda (תניינא יו״ד סימן ע׳), the lenient conclusion of the Taz does not cover every opinion (פתחי תשובה יו״ד קכ״ה ס״ק א). |
| Lekhatchila, for all of them | The Shach (notes 4, 5, 9) and the Taz (note 6) repeat that these leniencies are of bediavad. No text in the siman permits arranging the act in advance. |
A note on method. This table cites only what stands written in the texts of the siman and of its two immediate neighbours. Contemporary streams of psika — Sephardic and Ashkenazi — extend these positions, but their application to the wines, the commercial chains and the mechanisms of today is not deduced from the seifim. To be confirmed with a Rav before any application.
| Modern case | Tool of the siman | Orientation (to be confirmed with your Rav) |
|---|---|---|
| A non-Jewish waiter moves a sealed bottle on the table | Seif 9 · רמב״ם הלכות מאכלות אסורות פרק י״ב הלכה ד | A sealed vessel being carried: nothing is done — אין דרך ניסוך בכך. The wine sloshing inside is not a stirring. |
| He tilts the bottle, or tips it without lifting it, and wine runs out | Seif 1 · Taz note 1 · Shach note 3 | That is koaḥ. The Rama's parenthesis (“he did not lift it”) is set aside by both nossei kelim of the siman: one does not rely on it to permit. |
| He opens a tap, a bung or a spout, and the wine flows | Seif 1 · שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ד:י״ד | This is exactly the case of the ברזא, which siman 124 calls koaḥ and which refers explicitly to our siman. Lifting plays no part in it. |
| He presses a button, a pump, a solenoid valve, a dispenser | Seif 2 (the links) — and beyond it | The siman supplies the principle of counting forces, but does not deal with a force that is no longer his own (motor, pressure, automaton). The categories one would need are not present here. A question to be asked as it stands, with a description of the mechanism. |
| He holds the glass while a Jew pours | Seif 8 | Permitted even to drink — unless he shakes the glass, or brings it toward the stream (the מצדד אצדודי of Taz note 12, on which the Pitchei Teshuva enters a reservation). |
| A Jew and a non-Jew carry or pour together | Seif 3 · Shach notes 5-6 · Taz note 6 | Permitted bediavad, even if the non-Jew could have managed alone — provided the Jew is an adult. Lekhatchila, no: this is not to be arranged. |
| The wine was already flowing and he rights the bottle, or jogs the pourer's hand | Seif 4 · Shach note 7 | Would it have flowed in any case? Then מסייע שאין בו ממש — permitted. If not, his act is what made it flow: koaḥ. |
| A courier, a porter, an employee stacking crates | Seif 4 · seif 11 | במלאכתו הוא עוסק and כחו שלא בכוונה: the siman permits, including what spilled — that is the explicit case of seif 11. |
| He adds water or ice to a glass of wine | Seif 7 · Shach notes 10-11 | Permitted even to drink so long as he does not aim to dilute; doubt leans toward leniency. The Shach adds that where diluting is not the custom, a known intent is needed to forbid. |
| An open carafe carried by a non-Jew, with nobody watching | Seif 10 | Full — forbidden for benefit (fear that he touched); partly empty and unshaken — permitted to drink, and the Rama rules וכן עיקר that it is so even when shaken. A Jew walking beside him and watching settles the question even when it is full. |
| The wine is mevushal | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ג:ג | Direct touch is already permitted; all the more so mere force. But the “mevushal” status of an industrial wine belongs to certification and psak, not to the language of the siman. |
| What becomes of the rest of the bottle? | Seif 1 (נצוק) · siman 126 | The Mehaber forbids what remains as well; the Rama brings the opposing view and is lenient only where the loss is great; the Shach and the Taz are more lenient still. The proper place of the question is siman 126. |
Le-ma'asse. Before asking, gather the facts the siman requires, in this order: which wine (mevushal or not); the vessel (sealed, open, full, partly empty); the exact act (moved, tilted, poured, tap opened, button pressed); the intent (did he know it was wine, was he busy at his task); who else was acting (was an adult Jew holding too, was he watching); and what is at stake (a glass, a bottle, a cellar). With those six items the question becomes askable. Without them no table can answer — and with them, your Rav is the one who answers.
| Question | The measure (in practice) | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Wine that came out by his force, intentionally | Forbidden to drink (not for benefit) | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:א ; רמב״ם הלכות מאכלות אסורות פרק י״ב הלכה ב |
| Lifting with nothing coming out | Permitted | רמב״ם הלכות מאכלות אסורות פרק י״ב הלכה ב |
| Tilting without lifting | The Rama permits; the Taz and the Shach reject the heter | הגה יו״ד קכ״ה:א ; ט״ז ס״ק א ; ש״ך ס״ק ג |
| Opening a spigot or a tap | Koaḥ — no lifting required | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ד:י״ד |
| What remains in the vessel | Forbidden משום נצוק; opposing view in the gloss; leniency where there is loss | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:א + הגה ; ש״ך ס״ק א ; ט״ז ס״ק ד |
| Two links (כח כחו) | Like his force — forbidden | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:ב |
| Three links (כח כח כחו) | Permitted bediavad, even to drink | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:ב |
| Lekhatchila, whatever the number of links | Forbidden | ש״ך יו״ד קכ״ה ס״ק ד |
| Jewish force and non-Jewish force mixed | Permitted bediavad if the Jew is an adult; a child does not count | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:ג ; ש״ך ס״ק ה–ו ; ט״ז ס״ק ו |
| The wine was already flowing | מסייע שאין בו ממש — permitted | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:ד ; ש״ך ס״ק ז |
| It would not have flowed without him | Forbidden | הגה יו״ד קכ״ה:ד |
| Busy at his work (unloading) | Permitted — במלאכתו הוא עוסק | הגה יו״ד קכ״ה:ד |
| An object thrown into the wine | Permitted even to drink | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:ה |
| An object pushed as far as the wine | Forbidden even for benefit; the Taz upholds the stringency for us | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:ה ; ט״ז ס״ק ז |
| Done in anger | Permitted even to drink | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:ה ; עבודה זרה ס׳ ע״ב |
| Grapes thrown into the press | Permitted bediavad; with a Jew helping, even lekhatchila | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:ו ; ש״ך ס״ק ט |
| Water thrown into the wine | Permitted even to drink, save an intent of mezigah; doubt → permitted | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:ז ; ש״ך ס״ק י–י״א |
| He pours and a Jew receives | What comes out is forbidden to drink | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:ח |
| A Jew pours and he holds the vessel | Permitted even to drink — unless he shook it | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:ח ; ש״ך ס״ק ט״ז ; ט״ז ס״ק י״ב |
| A sealed vessel carried | Permitted — אין דרך ניסוך בכך | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:ט ; רמב״ם הלכות מאכלות אסורות פרק י״ב הלכה ד |
| An open vessel, full, unwatched | Forbidden for benefit — שמא נגע | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:י |
| An open vessel, partly empty | Permitted to drink; וכן עיקר even if shaken | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:י ; ש״ך ס״ק י״ט |
| A Jew walking beside him and watching | Permitted even when full | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:י |
| Carried by two, or a bucket by its ring | Permitted even when full — under the Rama's condition | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:י + הגה ; ש״ך ס״ק כ׳ |
| Wine that came out while walking, unintentionally | Permitted to drink, including what came out | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ה:י״א ; ש״ך ס״ק כ״ב |
| Mevushal wine | Even direct touch is permitted | שו״ע יו״ד קכ״ג:ג |
| Posek | Decisive contribution (anchored in the corpus) |
|---|---|
| Mehaber (eleven seifim) | The founding case and nitzok (s.1); the count of forces (s.2); mixed force and the child (s.3); wine already flowing (s.4); the object thrown, pushed, thrown in anger (s.5); grapes into the press (s.6); water and mezigah (s.7); who holds what while pouring (s.8); the sealed vessel (s.9); the open vessel, full or partly empty, watched or not (s.10); wine that came out while walking (s.11). |
| Rama (glosses on s.1, s.4, s.10) | s.1: the view that there is no nitzok for koaḥ, the stringency save where the loss is great, and the parenthesis “he did not lift the vessel”; s.4: the twofold distinction — would it not have flowed without him, and the non-Jew who jogs the hand of the Jew; s.10: וכן עיקר on the shaken vessel, and the condition about the pole through the ring. |
| Taz (טורי זהב, thirteen notes) | Note 1: the longest in the siman — koaḥ requires no lifting, against the Beit Yosef and against the gloss of the Rama; note 4: the Rama's wording about great loss is imprecise; note 6: why mixed force is lenient, and that all this is bediavad; note 7: the pushed object stays forbidden even for us; note 9: the baskets, the vats and the winepress of his day; note 12: the three readings of the מצדד אצדודי; note 13: carrying as one walks is not a manner of libation. |
| Shach (שפתי כהן, twenty-two notes) | Note 1: the threefold contradiction on nitzok, וצ״ע, and the leniency where there is loss; note 2: the Rama spoke only מן הדין; note 3: צ״ע on the parenthesis “without lifting”, refuted from the Ramban, from Tosafot and from the Mordechai; note 4: lekhatchila forbidden even at ten forces; notes 5-6: the bounds of the heter of mixed force; note 7: the reason of מסייע שאין בו ממש; note 9: the grapes, and lekhatchila; notes 10-11: water and mezigah in these lands; notes 16-19: the shaken vessel, the closed skin, the narrow mouth, the wide vessel; notes 20-22: the pole, the wine that spurts back, and the dripping barrel. |
| Pitchei Teshuva (note 1) | A single note on the whole siman, on the ואם נדנד of seif 8: the lenient conclusion of the Taz does not cover every opinion, according to the Noda BiYehuda (תניינא יו״ד סימן ע׳). |
| Rambam (הלכות מאכלות אסורות פרק י״ב) | Halakha 2: the source of seif 1, together with its counterpart — he lifted and nothing came out, permitted; halakha 3: the vessel held on the ground and the shaking, source of seif 8; halakha 4: the sealed vessel carried about, source of seif 9; halakha 6: unintentional koaḥ, as a general rule. |
| Gemara (עבודה זרה ס׳) | 60a: גוי אדנא וישראל אכובא, the מצדד צדודי, the skin carried, and the line that founds the siman — בכחו כולי עלמא לא פליגי דאסיר, כי פליגי בכח כחו; 60b: the Mishna of the barrel thrown in anger, זה היה מעשה והכשירו. |
DAAT דעת — © 5786 / 2026 · Back to home · Siman קכ״ה · ♥ Support