✦ ❖ ✦

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

שולחן ערוך · יורה דעה

Siman 98 — A Prohibition Mixed into Permitted Food and Its Nullification (ביטול בששים) — Practical psika

סימן צ״ח · הלכה למעשה

דִּין אִסּוּר שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בְּהֶתֵּר וְאֹפֶן בִּטּוּלוֹ

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

⚖️ פסק הלכה ולמעשה ⚖️

✦ ❖ ✦

Halakha le-ma'asse — the practical psika

The foundation of ביטול בששים: מין במינו / מין בשאינו מינו, the non-Jew's taste (קפילא) and its abandonment,
how to evaluate the sixty, the utensil that does not become נבילה, the sixty-one for the egg,
the fifty-nine for the כחל, and the prohibitions that never nullify

Subject:
שולחן ערוך יורה דעה סימן צ״ח (ט' 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 98.
It is a level of practical psika: what one does, and whom to ask.

Writing and iyun:
הרב יוסף חיים סממה · DAAT

How to read this level. Every statement is anchored either in the text of the Shulchan Aruch and its nossei kelim (Shach, Taz, Pri Megadim, Pitchei Teshuva), or in a named responsum of the contemporary poskim. On Yoreh De'ah there is neither a Mishnah Berurah (which comments only on Orach Chaim), nor a Shulchan Aruch HaRav / Da'at HaRav (the Admur HaZaken did not write the YD). Every concrete application (le-ma'asse) concludes with the referral to your Rav: real cases blend factual details (exact volumes, the nature of the prohibition, whether it imparts taste, earthenware or metal utensil, already cooked or not) that only a posek who sees your situation can decide.

📑 תוכן העניינים

שורש הסימן — מין במינו ומין בשאינו מינו, ויסוד הביטול בששים (סעיף א')
פסק המחבר והרמ״א — מסגרת ההלכה בט' סעיפים
הקפילא ושיעור הששים — אין סומכין על העכו״ם, ומדידה במידה (סעיף א')
נשפך, שם וטעם — ומחלוקת הש״ך והט״ז (סעיף ב')
לפנינו ואינו ניכר לשער — ספק הבא ממיעוט הכרה (סעיף ג')
ששים נגד כל האיסור — קדירה וכף, אש ומליחה, חובת ההסרה (סעיף ד')
כלי שאינו נעשה נבילה — וחצי כזית (סעיף ה'–ו')
הביצה והכחל — סא ונט, ומה שאינו בטל לעולם (סעיף ז'–ח')
פסיקת הספרדים בזמננו — Yabia Omer, Yalkut Yossef, Or LeTzion
פסיקת האשכנזים — acharonim and poskim
מקרים מודרניים — E-numbers, gelatin, labels, non-kosher pots
סיכום מעשי וטבלאות — ולמעשה, שאל את רבך

📜 The text of the Shulchan Aruch — Seif Alef

אִסּוּר שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בְּהֶתֵּר מִין בְּשֶׁאֵינוֹ מִינוֹ, כְּגוֹן חֵלֶב שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בְּבָשָׂר — יִטְעֲמֶנּוּ עוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים; אִם אוֹמֵר שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ טַעַם, אוֹ שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ טַעַם אֶלָּא שֶׁהוּא פָּגוּם, מֻתָּר.

וְאִם אֵין שָׁם עוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים לְטָעֳמוֹ, מְשַׁעֲרִים בְּשִׁשִּׁים. וְכֵן מִין בְּמִינוֹ, דְּלֵיכָּא לְמֵיקַם אַטַּעֲמָא — מְשַׁעֲרִים בְּשִׁשִּׁים. (הגה: וּבַזְּמַן הַזֶּה אֵין סוֹמְכִין עַל הָעוֹבֵד כּוֹכָבִים, וּמְשַׁעֲרִים הַכֹּל בְּשִׁשִּׁים.)

Taste (קפילא). A prohibition mixed into permitted food, of a different kind (מין בשאינו מינו), e.g. forbidden fat (חֵלֶב) mixed into meat: a non-Jew tastes it; if he says there is no taste, or a taste but spoiled (פגום) → permitted.

No non-Jew → one evaluates by sixty. Likewise same kind (מין במינו), where one cannot judge by taste → one evaluates by sixty. Rama: today one no longer relies on a non-Jew; one evaluates everything by sixty.

— Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh De'ah 98:1 · talmudic basis: the sugyot of Chullin (טעם כעיקר, ביטול) · Sefaria YD 98:1

1. שורש הסימן — the ביטול בששים and its two regimes

The foundation. Siman 98 is the founding siman of ביטול בששים — the nullification of a prohibition mixed into permitted food. Everything turns on a two-regime grid: מין במינו (same kind, e.g. permitted meat and forbidden meat) and מין בשאינו מינו (different kinds, e.g. forbidden fat and meat). From this distinction flow the role (then the abandonment) of the טעימת קפילא, the measure of 60, and — through the nossei kelim — the decisive question of taste (טעם כעיקר).

The Taz's yesod (s.k. 3) — to retain above all. מין במינו: by the Torah it nullifies בְּרוֹב (אחרי רבים להטות); the Sages required 60 (rabbinically). Consequence: in doubt (e.g. spilled, seif 2), one is lenient. מין בשאינו מינו: טעם כעיקר by the Torah, hence 60 by Torah law. Consequence: in doubt, one is stringent. This asymmetry is the key to the whole siman, and the Shach (s.k. 1) specifies that forbidden fat (חֵלֶב = תרבא), whose taste differs from that of meat, is indeed מין בשאינו מינו.

נותן טעם לפגם, סופו להשביח — why the "פגום" permits

Seif 1 permits even a spoiled (פגום) taste: a prohibition that gives only a degraded taste (נותן טעם לפגם) does not render forbidden. Two reservations in the text: (1) only if it is not destined to improve later (סופו להשביח) — otherwise one forbids it; (2) only if the non-Jew does not know one is relying on him (lest he lie). These two conditions frame the entire avenue of taste — an avenue the Rama, for our era, abandons in favor of the 60.

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

Siman 98 contains 9 seifim. The Mehaber lays the framework of ביטול בששים (sometimes in favor of the טעימת קפילא); the Rama (הגה) glosses, and above all establishes that we no longer rely on a non-Jew's taste — hence everything by 60. Here is the overall map, as it emerges from the text itself.

Seif	Subject	Psak (anchored in the text)
1	מין בשאינו מינו / מין במינו; taste	שאינו מינו (חֵלֶב in meat): non-Jew tastes; no taste, or פגום taste → permitted (if not סופו להשביח, and he does not know one relies on him). No non-Jew → 60. במינו (no judgment by taste) → 60. Rama: today one no longer relies on the non-Jew → everything by 60.
2	נשפך (spilled); שם; combination	במינו spilled, unmeasurable: known the permitted was majority (רובו היתר) → permitted; else forbidden. Rama: follow the name (שם), not the taste. שאינו מינו spilled → forbidden even if the permitted was majority (טעם כעיקר by Torah law). Mixed in its kind + another kind, spilled, its kind majority → סלק את שאינו מינו, the kind nullifies it.
3	לפנינו (before us) unmeasurable	All that is when spilled; but a prohibition לפנינו impossible to measure → forbidden, even a rabbinic prohibition (the leniency of the "spilled" does not apply here).
4	60 against ALL the prohibition; utensils; ההסרה	Prohibition cooked with permitted, discarded → 60 against the whole prohibition (one does not know how much exuded). Forbidden pot bat yoma / dipped ladle → 60 against the whole pot / dipped part. Rama: if absorbed by fire → the whole utensil; by מליחה → כדי קליפה only (siman 69). Stricter for metal (חם מקצתו חם כולו) → Rama follows the first opinion. Recognizable prohibition → must be removed even after the 60 (milk congealed by cold water). Falls again elsewhere → re-nullify; twice in the same → one 60 (siman 94).
5	כמה בלע (known quantity); כלי	One knows how much: new / non-bat-yoma ladle that absorbed a kazayit of milk → 60 against the kazayit alone (a utensil does not make חתיכה נעשית נבילה). Old and bat yoma ladle → against everything. Rama: the 1st opinion is the essential (siman 92); some distinguish חרס (becomes נבילה) vs other utensils; good to be stringent.
6	חצי כזית (half-kazayit)	A half-kazayit of prohibition → one needs 60 half-kazayit of permitted (even for a rabbinic prohibition — one does not neglect the measure).
7	the ביצה (egg): 61	Egg containing a chick (אפרוח) or a drop of blood cooked with others → one needs 61 (the forbidden egg counting itself: 60 others + it).
8	the כחל: 59; what never nullifies	The כחל (udder) nullifies in 59. Rama: everything nullifies in 60 except חמץ בפסח and יין נסך; and only if the prohibition imparts no taste; what imparts taste and is forbidden in itself (salt, spices, עבידי לטעמא) does not nullify even in a thousand (end of siman 105).
9	מצטרף (combination) to nullify	59 kazayit of permitted + 1 of blood + 1 of milk → each combines with the 59 to nullify the other. Likewise 29 + milk and 30 + blood mixed by error (בשוגג) → permitted. Rama: a fortiori 1 of cheese and 1 of meat, each nullifies the other.

כלל הפסק של הסימן :
יסוד אחד חותך את הסימן — ביטול בששים, ושני אופניו: מין במינו (בטל ברוב מדאורייתא, ששים מדרבנן → ספק לקולא) ומין בשאינו מינו (טעם כעיקר, ששים מדאורייתא → ספק לחומרא). ולמנהגנו אין סומכין על טעימת עכו״ם, ומשערים הכל בששים ; וכל איסור הנותן טעם ואסור בעצמו — אינו בטל לעולם.

3. הקפילא ושיעור הששים — the abandoned taste, and how to measure

ואם אין שם עובד כוכבים לטעמו, משערים בששים ; וכן מין במינו, דליכא למיקם אטעמא, משערים בששים.

— שולחן ערוך יו״ד צ״ח:א ; הגה: ובזמן הזה אין סומכין על העובד כוכבים, ומשערים הכל בששים.

The Mehaber and the Rama. For the Mehaber, the טעימת קפילא remains the avenue le-chatchila in מין בשאינו מינו: no taste (or פגום taste) → permitted. The Rama (הגה) rules for our era: one no longer relies on a non-Jew and one evaluates everything in 60. The kapila is therefore no longer the practical avenue; it nonetheless remains the conceptual landmark — which is why the Pitchei Teshuva (s.k. 3) still discusses whether a Jew who is expert could taste (Bekhor Shor, Pri Megadim).

How to measure the 60 (Pitchei Teshuva s.k. 2). A major practical point: one measures the sixty by volume (במידה), and not by weight — thus the Shaar Ephraim and the Avodat ha-Gershuni, with nuances from the Hinoukh Beit Yehouda. Concretely, it is the ratio of volumes between the permitted and the prohibition that determines whether there is sixty, not the scale.

Pitchei Teshuva (s.k. 5): the source of טעם כעיקר by Torah law is debated (the verse of משרת, or גיעולי עכו״ם). The Noda BiYhouda specifies that it is only by Torah law for the לאוין punishable by מלקות — a distinction that weighs toward leniency in doubts.

Le-ma'asse (taste and the 60). For us, the טעימת קפילא is no longer the avenue: one evaluates in 60 by volume, never by weight, and in every case (Rama). If there is sixty times the volume of permitted against the prohibition, the dish is permitted. The exact calculation (which volume counts, what one includes, מינו or שאינו מינו) depends on the case — ask your Rav. For the application to your precise situation, consult your Rav (or a competent Dayan).

4. נשפך, שם וטעם — and the Shach / Taz machloket of seif 2

מין במינו שנתערב ונשפך באופן שאי אפשר לשער: אם ידוע שהיה רובו היתר — מותר ; ואם לאו — אסור. אבל מין בשאינו מינו שנשפך — אף שידוע שהיה רובו היתר, אסור.

— שולחן ערוך יו״ד צ״ח:ב

Situation (spilled, נשפך)	Mehaber	Rama / key
מין במינו, known majority permitted	Permitted (במינו nullifies by rov of the Torah)	Follow the name (שם), not the taste
מין בשאינו מינו spilled	Forbidden even if the permitted was majority	טעם כעיקר by Torah law → one is stringent
Mixed in its kind + other kind, spilled	סלק את שאינו מינו; the majority kind nullifies	One sets aside the non-kind "as if nonexistent"

שם and not טעם — and the machloket of psak (Pitchei Teshuva s.k. 4)

For the Rama, מין במינו is defined by the name (שם): if both bear the same name, it is במינו, even if their tastes differ; and conversely. Hence practical debates (Pitchei Teshuva s.k. 4): are בשר עוף / בשר בהמה (poultry / cattle meat) "the same name"? The דם / חלב (blood / milk) relative to meat? These qualifications decide the regime (rov or טעם כעיקר) and thus the leniency or the stringency.

The great Shach / Taz machloket of seif 2 — let us give the psak

The Shach is stringent: for מין בשאינו מינו spilled, the prohibition remains (טעם כעיקר by Torah law); he does not allow himself to be lenient by the "majority permitted." The Chatam Sofer and the Pri Hadach go with the Shach — hence, practically, the requirement to peel the meat that touched a sauce of prohibition בעין (the prohibition in its substance does not nullify).
The Taz, in his analysis, tends to permit more broadly, relying on the rov in certain configurations (and on the Rashba's סלק את מינו, which he inverts, s.k. 5).
הכרעה: on מין בשאינו מינו spilled, the halakha le-ma'asse follows the stringency of the Shach (Pitchei Teshuva s.k. 7) — one does not rely on "rov" alone against a טעם כעיקר by Torah law. In מין במינו, by contrast, the rov keeps its force (the leniency of seif 2).

Le-ma'asse (spilled, שם / טעם). First distinguish the regime by the name: same name = במינו (rov, leniency in doubt); different name = שאינו מינו (טעם כעיקר, stringency). On שאינו מינו spilled, one follows the Shach (stringent); the prohibition in its substance (בעין) does not nullify and must be removed (peel the meat). Qualifying "same name or not," "spilled or לפנינו" is delicate — ask your Rav. For the application to your precise situation, consult your Rav (or a competent Dayan).

5. לפנינו ואינו ניכר לשער — the doubt that does not release

לא אמרו להתיר ברובא אלא כשנשפך ; אבל איסור המעורב בהיתר והוא לפנינו, ואי אפשר לשערו — אסור, אפילו הוא איסור דרבנן.

— שולחן ערוך יו״ד צ״ח:ג

ספק הבא ממיעוט הכרה (Taz s.k. 6). Seif 3 is counter-intuitive: the leniency of the "spilled" (where one says "there was probably a majority of permitted") does not apply when the prohibition is before us (לפנינו) but simply impossible to measure. The Taz (in the name of the Mordechai) calls this a ספק הבא ממיעוט הכרה — a doubt that arises only from our inability to measure, and which is not a true ספק. This is why he forbids even a rabbinic prohibition, where an ordinary ספק דרבנן would be permitted (leniently).

Nuance — Amunat Shmuel. For certain particular cases (a prohibition that is only rabbinic, such as דם in a configuration where the prohibition is not clearly "מוטל עליו"), one finds a softer reading: not every unmeasurable ספק לפנינו is necessarily treated with the same rigor. Not to decide alone — this is precisely the kind of factual distinction that only a Rav rules upon.

Le-ma'asse (לפנינו unmeasurable). Retain the hard rule: when the prohibition is before our eyes but one cannot evaluate the 60, one does not become lenient on the grounds of "doubt," even if the prohibition is only rabbinic. One does not transfer onto a reasoning of רוב what requires a real measurement. Knowing whether a case is "spilled" or "לפנינו," and whether it involves a nuance (דם, rabbinic), is a question of fact — ask your Rav. For the application to your precise situation, consult your Rav (or a competent Dayan).

6. ששים נגד כל האיסור — pot, ladle, fire and מליחה, and חובת ההסרה

איסור שנתבשל עם ההיתר, אף שהוא ניכר ושלם והשליכו — צריך ששים כנגד כולו, שאין אנו יודעים כמה יצא ממנו. לפיכך המבשל בקדירה אסורה בת יומא, או שתחב כף אסורה — משערים בששים כנגד כל הקדירה / כל מה שתחב.

— שולחן ערוך יו״ד צ״ח:ד

Case	Measure	Key / source
Prohibition cooked then discarded	60 against all the prohibition	One does not know how much exuded
Cooked in a forbidden pot bat yoma	60 against the whole pot	Absorption unknown (חרס, wood, metal)
Forbidden ladle dipped	60 against the whole dipped part	Rama: 1st opinion (≠ חם מקצתו חם כולו)
Absorbed by fire	The whole utensil is concerned	Rama
Absorbed by מליחה (salting)	כדי קליפה only	Rama; see siman 69

חובת ההסרה (Rama, seif 4) — the most practical point. A prohibition nullified by 60, if one recognizes it, must be removed, even after its taste has been nullified: as long as it is separable, it is as if recognizable. Hence the famous example: milk fallen into a dish and nullified in 60 → one pours in cold water, the milk congeals and floats, and one removes it. The Taz (s.k. 7) even discusses whether this removal by cold water would help at less than 60 (Mordechai vs Or Zaroua) — a debate not to decide alone.

חוזר וניעור / falling again (Rama, seif 4). A prohibition nullified then removed, which falls into another pot → one must re-nullify in 60 against everything, and so on. But if it falls twice into the same pot → a single 60 suffices (referral to siman 94). This is the logic "as long as one is in the same vessel, one counts once."

Le-ma'asse (60 against everything, utensils, ההסרה). Three golden rules: (1) against a forbidden pot/ladle, one counts 60 against all that may have been imbued, absorption by fire spreading through the whole utensil (מליחה only כדי קליפה); (2) a recognizable/separable prohibition must be removed even after the 60 (milk congealed by cold water); (3) fallen again elsewhere → re-nullify. But evaluating "bat yoma or not," "fire or salting," "separable or not" are questions of fact — ask your Rav. For the application to your precise situation, consult your Rav (or a competent Dayan).

7. כלי שאינו נעשה נבילה — the utensil, and the half-kazayit

No חתיכה נעשית נבילה for a utensil (seif 5)

Known quantity (כמה בלע): if one knows how much the utensil absorbed — e.g. a new or non-bat-yoma ladle that absorbed a kazayit of milk, then stirred a meat pot → it suffices to have 60 against that kazayit. One does not say חתיכה נעשית נבילה for a utensil, even if it served to stir a prohibition: the utensil remains a "container," not a "forbidden body."
Old and bat-yoma ladle: there, one does not know how much it absorbed → one evaluates against everything. Some say that even there 60 against the kazayit suffices.
Rama: the first opinion is the essential (as in siman 92, the drop of milk). Some do not distinguish old/new but only חרס (which cannot be purged by הגעלה → becomes נבילה) vs other utensils (not). It is good to be stringent.

הכרעה. The yesod of seif 5: a utensil does not become נבילה. One therefore nullifies against the known quantity it absorbed (כדי קליפה / one kazayit), without striking the whole dish. The stringency retained by the Rama targets chiefly the חרס (earthenware not recoverable by הגעלה), where one is stricter — hence the practice of replacing earthenware that became forbidden rather than koshering it.

חצי כזית (seif 6). A half-kazayit of prohibition mixed into permitted → one needs sixty half-kazayit of permitted to nullify it. The Taz (s.k. 9) emphasizes: לא תזלזל בשיעורא דרבנן — one does not neglect the measure, even for a rabbinic prohibition. The "60" is not an absolute threshold of quantity, but a ratio; a small prohibition requires proportionally little permitted, but the ratio of 60 remains.

Le-ma'asse (utensil, half-kazayit). A utensil that served for a prohibition does not "become" forbidden: one nullifies against the known quantity it absorbed — except the חרס, where one is stringent (better to replace). And the ביטול בששים is a ratio: even a half-kazayit requires 60 times its volume. Estimating "how much the utensil absorbed," "חרס or metal," is a question of fact — ask your Rav. For the application to your precise situation, consult your Rav (or a competent Dayan).

8. הביצה והכחל — 61, 59, and what never nullifies

ביצה שיש בה אפרוח או טיפת דם, שנתבשלה עם אחרות — צריך אחת ושישים לבטלה. והכחל מתבטל בחמישים ותשע.

— שולחן ערוך יו״ד צ״ח:ז–ח

Special case	Measure	Reason (anchored in the text)
Egg (אפרוח / drop of blood)	61	The forbidden egg counts itself: 60 others + it = 61
כחל (udder)	59	Already half permitted: one volume short of 60
חמץ בפסח	Does not nullify	Rama — as explained in its place
יין נסך	Does not nullify	Rama — as explained in its place
Salt, spices (עבידי לטעמא)	Even in a thousand → not nullified	Impart taste and forbidden in themselves (end of siman 105)

דבר שאינו בטל — what imparts taste (seif 8, Rama). General rule of the Rama: all prohibitions in force today nullify in 60, except חמץ בפסח and יין נסך. And on condition that the prohibition imparts no taste in the pot: if it imparts taste and is forbidden in itself, even in a thousand it does not nullify as long as its taste is perceived. This is why salt and spices (עבידי לטעמא), forbidden in themselves, do not nullify in 60.

Taz (s.k. 11): why then does the fat (שומן) of a prohibition, which "עביד לטעמא," nullify in 60? The Taz raises the question and compares to an egg laid on Yom Tov — a subtle distinction between "what is made for taste in itself" (salt, spices) and "what happens to impart taste" (fat). Pitchei Teshuva (s.k. 9) joins to it wine and vinegar (עבידי לטעמא). To know, not to decide alone.

מצטרף לבטל — the combination (seif 9)

A pot of 59 kazayit of permitted into which fall two kazayit — one of blood, one of milk: each combines with the 59 of permitted to nullify the other. Likewise 29 of permitted + a kazayit of milk, and 30 + a kazayit of blood, mixed by error (בשוגג) → permitted. Rama: a fortiori two kazayit, one of cheese and one of meat, where each nullifies the other. The Chavot Daat (reported Pitchei Teshuva s.k. 10) specifies the rules: the combination operates only for different tastes; same tastes / same name / יבש ביבש → do not combine.

Le-ma'asse (61 / 59 / what does not nullify). Numerical cases to memorize: 61 for the forbidden egg (it counts itself), 59 for the כחל (half permitted). And the absolute limit: חמץ בפסח, יין נסך, and anything that imparts taste while being forbidden in itself (salt, spices) never nullifies. For the combination of two prohibitions, do not apply the rules of the Chavot Daat alone (different tastes required) — ask your Rav. For the application to your precise situation, consult your Rav (or a competent Dayan).

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 98 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 exactly from the framework of the Mehaber: the ביטול בששים measured by volume, the distinction מין במינו / שאינו מינו, and the criterion of taste. On the doubt in מין במינו, the Sephardic school tends to retain the leniency of seif 2 (rov), whereas in מין בשאינו מינו (טעם כעיקר by Torah law) one follows the stringency of the Shach. Rav Ovadia, faithful to his method, readily articulates these principles with the ספק ספיקא and the הפסד גדול for rabbinic prohibitions.

Concrete case	Sephardic orientation (to be verified)
Prohibition mixed, same kind (מין במינו)	60 by volume; in doubt (spilled) one retains the leniency of the rov (seif 2).
Prohibition mixed, different kind (שאינו מינו)	60 by Torah law (טעם כעיקר); one follows the Shach (stringent); prohibition בעין → peel / remove.
Measuring the sixty	By volume, not by weight (Pitchei Teshuva s.k. 2).
Non-kosher pot used by mistake	60 against the whole pot (bat yoma); non-bat-yoma → often permitted; הגעלה to recover.

Anchoring in the siman. All of this follows from the text: the ביטול בששים by volume (seif 1, PT s.k. 2), שם / טעם (seif 2), the ספק לפנינו (seif 3), 60 against all the prohibition and the utensil (seifim 4-5), the numerical cases 61 / 59 (seifim 7-8), and what never nullifies (seif 8). 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 (Chochmat Adam, Aruch HaShulchan YD). Two features of the Rama dominate this siman: (1) one does not rely on a non-Jew's taste, one evaluates everything in 60; (2) the חובת ההסרה — a recognizable/separable prohibition must be removed even after the 60. On מין בשאינו מינו spilled, Ashkenazi practice follows the stringency of the Shach (Chatam Sofer, Pri Hadach): one peels what touched the prohibition בעין rather than relying on the rov.

Concrete case	Ashkenazi orientation (to be verified)
Evaluation in 60	Always, by volume; one does not rely on the non-Jew's taste (Rama, seif 1).
מין בשאינו מינו spilled	One follows the Shach (stringent); prohibition בעין → peel / remove (Chatam Sofer).
חובת ההסרה	Remove the recognizable prohibition even after the 60 (milk congealed by cold water).
Forbidden חרס	Stringency of the Rama: one does not recover earthenware (becomes נבילה); one replaces it.

Chabad — only through real sources. The Shulchan Aruch HaRav does not cover Yoreh De'ah; there is therefore no "Da'at HaRav" on siman 98. 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 and industry

How siman 98 sheds light on the modern kitchen. The ביטול בששים is the most-invoked principle of all industrial kashrut: additives, flavorings, gelatin, label-reading, utensils. Four tools of the siman serve to decide: (1) 60 by volume (seif 1, PT s.k. 2); (2) the criterion "does it impart taste?" (seif 8); (3) the utensil that does not become נבילה (seif 5); (4) the combination מצטרף (seif 9).

Modern case	Tool of the siman	Orientation (to be confirmed with the Rav)
Additives (E-numbers) and forbidden flavorings in a product	Seif 8 (what imparts taste)	A flavoring, made to impart taste (עביד לטעמא) and forbidden in itself, does not nullify even in a tiny quantity; a mere residue without taste may be bâtel in 60 — a decisive distinction.
Gelatin of doubtful origin in a food	Seif 1, 8 (במינו/שאינו מינו; taste)	Depending on whether it imparts taste and its status (forbidden in itself or not); a fundamental debate among poskim → to decide case by case.
Label-reading (proportions of an ingredient)	Seif 1, 2 (60 by volume; שם)	Estimate whether the forbidden ingredient is bâtel be-shishim by volume; but if it imparts taste, the percentage does not help.
Non-kosher pot used by mistake	Seif 4-5 (60 against everything; כלי)	Bat yoma → 60 against the whole pot; non-bat-yoma → often permitted; the utensil does not "become" נבילה; חרס → one replaces.
Accidental mixture of two prohibitions in a dish	Seif 9 (מצטרף)	Two prohibitions of different tastes may combine with the permitted to nullify; same tastes / same name → not (Chavot Daat).

Le-ma'asse. These situations blend questions of fact — does the prohibition impart taste, is it forbidden in itself, in what volume, was the utensil bat yoma, חרס or metal — that only your Rav can decide upon seeing the case (and often by consulting a kashrut agency). The practical rule: reconstruct precisely what is mixed, in what proportion, and whether it imparts taste, then ask your Rav. For the application to your precise situation, consult your Rav (or a competent Dayan).

12. סיכום מעשי — summary and tables

טבלה — the ביטול בששים, in practice

Case	Measure (for us)	Note
Prohibition mixed, same kind (במינו)	60 by volume; doubt → leniency (rov)	בטל ברוב by Torah law, 60 rabbinically (Taz s.k. 3)
Prohibition mixed, different kind (שאינו מינו)	60 by volume; doubt → stringency	טעם כעיקר by Torah law; Shach stringent (PT s.k. 7)
Prohibition לפנינו unmeasurable	Forbidden, even rabbinic	ספק הבא ממיעוט הכרה (Taz s.k. 6)
Forbidden pot / ladle bat yoma	60 against everything (fire); כדי קליפה (מליחה)	The utensil does not make חנ״נ (seif 5)
Recognizable prohibition nullified in 60	One must remove it	Milk congealed by cold water (Rama, seif 4)
Forbidden egg / כחל	61 / 59	The egg counts itself; the כחל half permitted
Imparts taste + forbidden in itself	Never nullifies	Salt, spices, חמץ בפסח, יין נסך (seif 8)
Two prohibitions, different tastes	מצטרף — each nullifies the other	Same tastes / same name → not (PT s.k. 10)

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

Posek	Decisive contribution (anchored in the corpus)
Mehaber (seifim 1-9)	קפילא and 60; שם / טעם in נשפך; לפנינו unmeasurable forbidden; 60 against all the prohibition (pot, ladle); כלי without חנ״נ and חצי כזית; 61 / 59; מצטרף.
Rama (הגה)	אין סומכין על העכו״ם — everything in 60 (seif 1); שם, not טעם (seif 2); fire vs מליחה, חובת ההסרה, חוזר וניעור (seif 4); חרס vs other utensils (seif 5); חמץ בפסח / יין נסך not nullified, what imparts taste (seif 8); cheese / meat מצטרף (seif 9).
Shach (Siftei Kohen)	s.k. 1: חֵלֶב = תרבא; its taste ≠ the taste of meat → מין בשאינו מינו (≠ Ra'avan). Stringency on שאינו מינו spilled (seif 2).
Taz (Turei Zahav)	s.k. 1: חֵלֶב מין בשאינו מינו; s.k. 3: the yesod (במינו ברוב / שאינו מינו 60 by Torah law); s.k. 5: the Rashba's סלק את מינו; s.k. 6: דעת שוטים / ספק הבא ממיעוט הכרה; s.k. 7: removal of milk by cold water; s.k. 8: machloket on כלים נ״נ (old/new/חרס); s.k. 9: half-kazayit; s.k. 11: the שומן עביד לטעמא; s.k. 14: the combination.
Pri Megadim (פר״מ)	On tasting by a Jew (with PT s.k. 3); the liver (כבד) that absorbs and does not exude (PT s.k. 11).
Pitchei Teshuva (פתחי תשובה)	s.k. 2: 60 by volume, not by weight (Shaar Ephraim); s.k. 3: tasting by a Jew (Bekhor Shor); s.k. 4: שם — בשר עוף/בהמה, דם/חלב; s.k. 5: טעם כעיקר by Torah law (Noda BiYhouda); s.k. 7: Shach forbids / Taz permits, Chatam Sofer (peel); s.k. 9: שומן / יין / חומץ עבידי לטעמא; s.k. 10: Chavot Daat (combination).

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

Sephardic: the school of Rav Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer, Yehaveh Da'at), Yalkut Yossef; Or LeTzion (Rav Ben-Tzion Abba Shaul). They extend the Mehaber: ביטול בששים by volume, the distinction במינו / שאינו מינו, the criterion of taste; leniency of the rov in מינו, stringency of the Shach in שאינו מינו.

Ashkenazi: acharonim and poskim (Chochmat Adam, Aruch HaShulchan YD). They extend the Rama: everything in 60, חובת ההסרה, stringency of the Shach (Chatam Sofer, Pri Hadach) on שאינו מינו, stringency on the חרס.

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 98: 98:1 · 98:2 · 98:4 · 98:8
Shach (Siftei Kohen): 98 s.k. 1
Taz (Turei Zahav): 98 s.k. 3 · 98 s.k. 6
Pitchei Teshuva: 98 s.k. 2 · 98 s.k. 7

👈 הלכה למעשה — the golden rule of this level

In substance, retain the yesod: ביטול בששים, with its two regimes — מין במינו (rov by Torah law, 60 rabbinically, leniency in doubt) and מין בשאינו מינו (טעם כעיקר by Torah law, stringency).
In practice, one does not rely on the non-Jew's taste: 60, measured by volume (PT s.k. 2); and a recognizable prohibition must be removed even after the 60.
What imparts taste and is forbidden in itself (salt, spices, חמץ בפסח, יין נסך) never nullifies; the egg requires 61, the כחל 59; and a utensil does not "become" נבילה.
And for any real case — does the prohibition impart taste, same kind or not, volume, type of utensil — halakha le-ma'asse goes through your Rav. For the application to your precise situation, consult your Rav (or a competent Dayan).

← Level 3 — Synthesis ↑ Siman צ״ח — contents

~ ~ ~ ~ ~
DAAT · הרב יוסף חיים סממה
תלמיד חכם · מעביר שיעורים בהלכה ובחסידות
פסק והלכה למעשה בדין איסור שנתערב בהיתר ואופן ביטולו · סימן צ״ח · ⚖️ 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