December 13, 2011 3:27 am at 3:27 am #601111
What’s the Halacha/issur?
Is this d’rabanan or d’oraisa??December 13, 2011 3:44 am at 3:44 am #977806
There’s actual fish in the ingredients?December 13, 2011 3:48 am at 3:48 am #977807HalfMember
It’s probably just made with fish products. but I highly doubt it actually has fish in it..December 13, 2011 3:48 am at 3:48 am #977808
It’s one of the last ingredients in a long list (23).December 13, 2011 3:59 am at 3:59 am #977809
I would suggest emailing the company, asking them if the anchovies are less than 1.6% of the entire product. If it isn’t, I would assume that most people would say it is fine for meat (batel b’shishim).December 13, 2011 4:05 am at 4:05 am #977810DyafMavenMember
batel b’shishim only works for accidents not if you want to do it on purposeDecember 13, 2011 4:08 am at 4:08 am #977811JotharMember
There is a machlokes haposkim if fish is batul beshishim or not with regards to meat, since it’s a davar sakanah. The OK labels Tropicana omega 3 OJ as OU fish. I herad besheim Rav Dovid Feinsten Shlit”a that he disagrees, and that we have no need to extend the chazal of fish and meat beyond what we have in mesorah. Being that we don’t see a sakanah today, we only have to be chosheish exactly as it’s brought down. It’s the same reason why you can buy peeled garlic cloves in most frum stores.
I was once in Target and saw Archer Farms chicken Seasoning…it was OU-D. One of the national hashgachos used to give hechsheirim to milchigs hot dog and hamburger buns. At this point, only the Triangle-K does that.December 13, 2011 4:13 am at 4:13 am #977812Boro Park GirlMember
Anchovies don’t even sound appetizing. The name itself grosses me out.December 13, 2011 4:16 am at 4:16 am #977813
In this case it would work, because the company already did it. By the time mommamia took it off the shelf it was already batul (if in fact the fish is less than 1/60 of the entire product). Also, here it is better because fish isn’t “issur” by itself. You just can’t mix it with meat.December 13, 2011 4:39 am at 4:39 am #977814
OU policy is not to write “Fish” if there is 60 against it.December 13, 2011 4:42 am at 4:42 am #977815
copied from culinarykosher.com
Question: Is WORCESTERSHIRE SAUCE Parev? There is a recipe for chicken which calls for it and I am confused.December 13, 2011 4:53 am at 4:53 am #977816
Rav Schachter says that this Halacha probably shouldn’t apply nowadays.December 13, 2011 4:54 am at 4:54 am #977817HaLeiViParticipant
If it works for Sakana it should work on purpose, too.December 13, 2011 5:44 am at 5:44 am #977818☕ DaasYochid ☕Participant
One of the national hashgachos used to give hechsheirim to milchigs hot dog and hamburger buns. At this point, only the Triangle-K does that.
Why would someone think that’s muttar? (Y.D. 97)December 13, 2011 6:26 am at 6:26 am #977819DyafMavenMember
something based on sakana is never batal. Does this sakana apply today that is a very complicated issue i seems but i never heard otherwise that it stopped applying
I’m not pasking halcah in this case im just telling you what I have learned to be true.December 13, 2011 11:48 am at 11:48 am #977820
Please explain this concept of sakana.
Why was fish and meat together considered mesukan?
Is that the entire basis for separating them??
The sauce I spoke of is clearly labeled ou fish (the words are small, but if you look, you can see it)). Accordingly, that would mean that the contents contain more than 1/60th of fish, correct?
If that is the case, what would the ou think the steak sauce is going to be used for (like I said, the only things left are fish and vegetables). That just desn’t make sense to me. Why bother putting a hechsher if it can’t be used for anything normal??December 13, 2011 12:12 pm at 12:12 pm #977821
In my opinion, and I heard this generality once from a mainstream godol, zt”l, if something is based on sakanah,and we know nowadays that this sakanah is not true or inapplicable, then the prohibition falls and the act is permissible.December 13, 2011 12:56 pm at 12:56 pm #977822Yehudis bas ElchananParticipant
“It’s the same reason why you can buy peeled garlic cloves in most frum stores.”
What does peeled garlic have to do with fish and meat eaten together?
I thought the peeled garlic was for cooks too lazy or too extravagant to peel their own cloves.December 13, 2011 3:04 pm at 3:04 pm #977823cherrybimParticipant
I learned in shiur given by a posek in Flatbush that while meat and fish may not do harm to the guf, it may however do harm to the yiddishe nashoma.December 13, 2011 3:16 pm at 3:16 pm #977824
Old Man, the issue of gilui is the same. The issur of drinking from an open container of standing water no longer applies because it is no longer recognized as a sakanah. Everyone else, why does fish and meat not follow the same principle?December 13, 2011 3:33 pm at 3:33 pm #977825
So, if the reason for the prohibition is inapplicable today (sakana) and the issur “falls to the wayside” (?), why then do we remove all fish related items before putting fleshing on the table on Shabbos?December 13, 2011 4:40 pm at 4:40 pm #977826JotharMember
Yoreh Deah permits milchigs bread if there is a siman on the loaf. The kashrus agencies would rely on the D on the wrapping. Very iffy. Most reputable kashrus agencies do not do this anymore for bread.
The gemara says it’s sakanah to eat fish and meat together. It’s not a kashrus issue but a sakanah issue. Rav Dovid Feinstein Shlit”a agrees to Rav Shachter partially in that it’s probably not applicable today, but he argues in that he would still keep to the exact case of the shulchan aruch. So it’s batul beshishim, it’s only cooking together that is the issue, and it’s fine to drink omega-3 oj with meat.
The gemara says that you can’t leave peeled eggs, onions, and garlic overnight due to sakanah. The shulchan aruch does not mention this halacha. Some poskim argue that it’s not relevant anymore, as it’s no longer a sakanah. Others say it’s relevant but only as-ism like Rav Dovid Feinstein Shlit”a. There is a kulah relied upon that it’s not an issue in large quantities, so you can buy peeled garlic from a store. Not too many people are makpid on this halacha anymore. Chassidim are makpid on this halacha for their products.December 13, 2011 4:54 pm at 4:54 pm #977827NechomahParticipant
DY – You posted the following: “One of the national hashgachos used to give hechsheirim to milchigs hot dog and hamburger buns. At this point, only the Triangle-K does that.
Why would someone think that’s muttar? (Y.D. 97)”
I agree with your question because when I first read this I thought it was saying milchig hot dogs and milchig hamburger buns, but then I realized that the hot dog buns are milchig and so are the hamburger buns (and not the hot dogs or hamburgers themselves). Just you obviously wouldn’t want to put fleishig hamburgers or hot dogs in them, pareve ones are OK or any other non-fleishig food that you might want to put into such a roll.December 13, 2011 6:06 pm at 6:06 pm #977828
I remember reading that studies were done about peeled onions that we’re left open for a while and it had, I think, an abundance of bacteria on it (more than would normally collect on food left out. I remember reading it was supposed to be downright dangerous and this wasn’t from a Jewish source. I have to try to look up where I heard it from.December 13, 2011 6:08 pm at 6:08 pm #977829
Getting back to the fish issue…
So, is it permitted to put steak sauce with fish products in it (labeled ou fish) on a hot burger or is this considered cooking it together?December 13, 2011 6:23 pm at 6:23 pm #977830
<So, if the reason for the prohibition is inapplicable today (sakana) and the issur “falls to the wayside” (?), why then do we remove all fish related items before putting fleshing on the table on Shabbos? >
Why, indeed. Mommamania, that is precicely my question. Hakol modim that gilui is no longer a concern with liquids. Why, then, is fish and meat still assur mipnei sakana? Is it really a still sakana or simply minhag? If it is, as I suspect, simply a minhag (as it is in my house, by the way)why do we not still observe the issur mipnei sakana of drinking standing uncovered water?December 13, 2011 6:24 pm at 6:24 pm #977831
Regardless of what the Halacha is/should be, the Minhag is very strong not to mix fish and meat (even cold, even same utensils, etc.).December 13, 2011 6:51 pm at 6:51 pm #977832
The difference would be this. If meat and fish is simply minhag and there no longer any real sakanah, then steak sauce containing anchovy,in which the fish content is not obvious and which is specifically intended for use with meat, should be perfectly fine.December 13, 2011 7:09 pm at 7:09 pm #977833feivelParticipant
This prohibition, known as mashkim megulim, “uncovered beverages,” is recorded in the Talmud(3) and codified by the Rambam as halachah which we are to practice today. But the Shulchan Aruch, who starts by quoting the Rambam, concludes by ruling that this edict no longer applies.(4) Since poisonous snakes and reptiles are rarely found in populated areas nowadays, there is no longer any reason to forbid drinking an uncovered, unsupervised beverage. The basic halachah follows this opinion and one is no longer required to concern himself with this prohibition.(5)
3 Avodah Zarah 30a and Chulin 9b. The original source is a Mishnah in Terumos 8:4.
4 Y.D. 116:1, based on the view of Tosfos, Rashba and Tur.
5 Mishnah Berurah 160:23.
where in the Shulchan Aruch do we find that the matzav of fish and meat together is no longer a sakana?
what is the logic even (similar to that of venemous snakes not being common any longer) that meat-fish is no longer a sakana?
where are the studies by modern physicians that demonstrate that meat-fish is not dangerous?
all we have an assumption, not based on any investigation by modern medicine, that it is not dangerous, perhaps because they assume it to be merely an ancient superstition.
and even so, where can you find any statement in a medical journal or other medical media that it is not dangerous?
i imagine if you ask the majority of medical practioners whether or not eating shrimp can cloud your cerebral processes, they will answer no. we dont even know for sure in what sense meat-fish is a sakana, physically, spiritually or both.
i believe that is the difference between the repealing of the Takanah on uncovered water (some Poskim actually hold it still is in effect) and the still existent Takanah on meat-fish.December 13, 2011 7:49 pm at 7:49 pm #977834
HaLeiVi hinted at a good point and that is that I would think that there should be no problem of ??? ?????? ????? ??????? by sakana. Do you have information about this? Because if so I would say that there will definitely be 60 in mommamia’s steak against the fish inside the sauce (we surely don’t say channan on the sauce, right?) and so it would be fine.December 13, 2011 8:20 pm at 8:20 pm #977835
One of the things that I find interesting by maskim megulim is that snake venom won’t hurt you if you swallow it (unless you have an bleeding ulcer or an open sore in your mouth). It has to be injected to work. Also, it is incorrect to say that snakes and reptiles, venomous or otherwise, are rarely found in populated areas, human habitation attracts rodents, and rats and mice are snakes favorite food. Just because you don’t see the snakes doesn’t mean that they aren’t there.December 13, 2011 8:31 pm at 8:31 pm #977836usa-tralianParticipant
I just discussed this with a Rav:
There are 2 reasons why fish and meat are Sakona. First, as brought by the gemorah is a practical reason, that one could choke if a fish bone gets stuck in meat – it could happen by a fish bone alone, but there is more of a chashash by meat. The second reason is in the Zohar that it is a ruchnius’dike sakona – I don’t know the details.
The difference is that the first reason the sakona is only mamash by eating them together, although lechatchila we should be choshesh for everything, however bedieved will be more meikel (for example cooking in the oven together). The chumras according to this stem from Chamura Sakanta Me’Issura. The second reason prohibits anything even bedieved.
This also would have a nafka mina by ein mevatlin apparently.December 13, 2011 8:49 pm at 8:49 pm #977837
The Gemara’s reason is not that one might choke on it, it’s that it brings tzara’as (Pesachim 76b). The Gemara says another thing – reicha – but I thought that meant bad breath. Chances are I’m way off.December 13, 2011 9:19 pm at 9:19 pm #977838zahavasdadParticipant
Anchovies are nasty, If you like Sardines you might like them otherwise they are nastyDecember 13, 2011 9:28 pm at 9:28 pm #977839
So, if the fish content is in a sauce, meaning pureed to the point where it’s not identifiable, than would the issue in the gemorah apply (no bones)?
Also, what is the Zohar considered…. Torah sh’be’al pe?December 13, 2011 11:59 pm at 11:59 pm #977840
As I told usa-tralian, the sakana in the Gemara is not bones. Also, the Zohar is no more halacha than Midrash is, meaning that if it is contradicted in the Gemara it is certainly not halacha, and if is not spoken about in the Gemara than it may be a good thing, but you do not have to follow it. Then again, I understand that you cut your nails in a particular order (as per that thread that time), so apparently you do tend to keep Kabbalistic stringencies. I am still waiting for hello99’s response to my question to him, he usually has a lot of sources, and if what I wrote was true then you may not have a problem altogether.December 14, 2011 2:18 am at 2:18 am #977841
I don’t know if I have a specific way of doing things meaning following kabbalistic stringencies or not. I learned about cutting the nails in a particular order in seminary from a reliable rav. I don’t think I ever asked for the source. I took it as Halacha lemaaseh (I think I learned it from a posek in sem). I thought the whole idea of clearing the fish plates was a geder that protects us from going further to Basar v’chalav. I never asked nor researched the source of this “minhag” until now.December 14, 2011 2:40 am at 2:40 am #977842
Well, you learn new things each day. Not eating fish and meat is a problem because it is a sakana according to the Gemara. The source for this is the Gemara Pesachim 76b right before the mishnah. Although there are those (most famously the Magen Avraham in Orach Chaim 173:1) who wish to say that it appears that there is no danger in our times, many people aren’t willing to say that it isn’t relevant anymore, and therefore regard it as an issur even in today’s day and age.December 14, 2011 3:35 am at 3:35 am #977843
If the gemoras reason is that it brings tzaraas than it’s speaking of a spiritual sakanah, since tzaraas is a spiritual onesh, right?December 14, 2011 4:00 am at 4:00 am #977844
That’s debatable. Someone tried to make that claim before but I was under the impression that in this case the Gemara meant leprosy or something like that, something physical. As far as I know the Gemara never uses the term sakana in this context to denote a spiritual danger.December 14, 2011 4:29 am at 4:29 am #977845☕ DaasYochid ☕Participant
since tzaraas is a spiritual onesh, right?</em.
Spiritual cause, physical manifestation. I’ve also wondered if the tzaraas associated with fish and meat is the same as the one associated with loshon horah (the tzaraas mentioned in the Torah).December 14, 2011 9:42 am at 9:42 am #977846
I understand the reluctance to stop practicing minhagim even when the original reason is no longer applicable. This attitude is generally a nice way to practice.
Nevertheless, if someone eats meat and gefilte fish from the same plate or with the same fork, I see nothing wrong with this practice. It is not a sakanah, and no research needs to be done. Certainly no more than research must be done to determne whether raisins in corn flakes is a sakanah, or bananas in jello. Let’s give credit to modern medicine, we all abide by its instructives.
The practice of removing all fish related items from the table before bringing meat is an unnecessary exagerration of this no-longer applicable minhag. If it is because “minhag yisrael kadosh”, then by all means do that. But those who do not practice this way are totally in the clear.December 14, 2011 3:33 pm at 3:33 pm #977847
apologies. exaggeration.December 14, 2011 3:54 pm at 3:54 pm #977848
Old man: There is a Sugya of Devarim Hamuttarim V’acheirim Nahagu Bahen Issur. You might want to learn that before making sweeping statements. The reason might not apply, but it’s not so easy just to stop those Minhagim.December 14, 2011 6:30 pm at 6:30 pm #977849
I have a custom not to reply to individuals, but since you seem to be a very learned young man, and your mentschlichkeit is unusually remarkable for this site, I’ll make an exception.
1. I do not advocate someone foresaking their minhag. However, if someone did not grow up with this minhag, I feel there is no reason to abide by it.
2. The main question in this sugya is whether one needs to have a hatarah in order to change their minhag, as the minhag becomes a neder. This question arises when the minhag is not mi’ikar hadin (that is, some say it is assur al pi din), but it is done for chumra or for prishus and the like.
3. One opinion is that this hatarah must be done. In that case, someone who totally separates fish and meat and wants to stop this practice would need a hatarah. So be it.
3. Another opinion is that if the minhag proves to have been a “ta’us”, no hatarah is necessary.
4. In my opinion, any custom which was thought to have been a sakanah and is now known not to be, can be considered a ta’us and one may decide on his own to stop the practice. Fish and meat would be considered to be in this category. It is not assur al pi din to use the same fork or plate for fish and meat. Rather, it was thought to be a sakanah, but it is not. Mentioning “spiritual sakanos” is a flight of fancy and I don’t consider that suggestion seriously.
In summary, anyone who practices this minhag and is comfortable with it should continue to do so. Anyone who did not practice this minhag need not begin to. Anyone who wants to stop practicing this minhag, or finds themselves in a situation where they cannot, may do so without a hatarah.December 14, 2011 6:52 pm at 6:52 pm #977850
Old man: I respectfully disagree. The Minhagim about separating fish and meat have long gone far beyond what the Poskim say is necessary to avoid. Whether the original Issur was due to Sakanah, there clearly are additional Minhagim on it that probably fall under “Prishus”. I would think that this counts as “Devarim Hamuttarim Veacheirim Nahagu Bahem Issur”. If you can be Mattir for an individual at all, it would need a Hatarah.December 14, 2011 9:42 pm at 9:42 pm #977851December 14, 2011 9:45 pm at 9:45 pm #977852
The Shela, Vilna Gaon and Chazon Ish said that one must be careful regarding uncovered water even today.December 14, 2011 9:46 pm at 9:46 pm #977853December 14, 2011 10:41 pm at 10:41 pm #977854PBTMember
Boro Park Girl
“Anchovies not appetizing.” You’re right. My father used to order pizza with everything on it that included anchovies. The taste and gritty texture feel like you’re eating very salty sandpaper. So although the ongoing discussion is on fish and meat, in the case of anchovies I no longer eat them alone or with anything else.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.