Halacha for Wednesday 12 Av 5781 July 21 2021

Nullification of Danger-Based Prohibitions

Question: Last Friday, I was standing next to the stove in the kitchen. The was an open pot of fish on the stove and alongside it, I was frying Schnitzel (coated chicken-breast) when mistakenly, some drops of oil from the frying pan flew into the pot of fish. Is the fish still permissible for consumption?

Answer: Let us first begin by explaining the root of the question. In the past, we have explained that it is forbidden to eat fish and meat together. We have explained that the reason for this is based on the tradition handed down to us by our Sages that eating fish and meat together causes illness and danger.

Regarding most food-related prohibitions, such as milk and meat mixtures, blood, and the like, the general rule is that when one of these forbidden foods gets mixed into another food, it becomes nullified by a ratio of one to sixty. For instance, if in our situation we were dealing with a pot of milk (not of fish) into which some drops of meat oil or gravy splashed into, the milk in the pot would have been permissible for consumption since the drops of meat are fairly miniscule and there is certainly more than sixty times the amount of milk in the pot against any meat drops which fell into it. Thus, those meat drops would have been nullified and everything would have been permissible for consumption.

Regarding our question, however, there is another issue we must discuss: Is something forbidden only by virtue of it being a “danger” (as opposed to an actual prohibition) also subject to the laws of nullification by a ratio of one to sixty? Clearly, if poison were to fall into a pot, it would certainly be forbidden to eat any of the food in the pot even if the amount of food in the pot were one-thousand times the amount of poison that fell in, for the laws of danger cannot be compared to the laws of the Torah! If so, it would seem that in our situation, we should not follow the rule of nullification by a ratio of one to sixty.

Maran Rabbeinu Ovadia Yosef zt”l has dealt with this matter at length over sixty years ago in a response printed in his Responsa Yabia Omer (Volume 1, Yoreh De’ah, Chapter 7). He quotes a great disagreement among the Poskim regarding this matter. Some rule leniently and write that there is no difference between matters of danger taught to us by our Sages and actual halachic prohibitions and just as we rule that regarding matters of Halacha a one to sixty ratio is considered nullified and is permissible, the same applies to issues of “danger”, such as meat and fish, as long as there is at least sixty times more in the mixture, everything is permissible for consumption. On the other hand, there are other great Poskim who rule that regarding matters of danger, there is no room for leniency even if there is nullification by a ratio of one to sixty.

While discussing this matter, Maran zt”l quotes the opinion of the saintly Hagaon Rabbeinu Chaim ben Atar (author of the famous commentary “Ohr Ha’Chaim” on the Torah) in his Sefer Peri To’ar where he writes, based on solid proofs from the Talmud, that the danger of fish and meat exists only when there are flavors of both fish and meat together. However, when one of them is nullified by a ratio of one to sixty and its flavor is completely undetectable in the mixture, there is no concern for any danger whatsoever. Maran zt”l adds that even if we say regarding other matters of danger (such as a snake releasing some of its venom into water) that the rule of nullification by a ratio of one to sixty is not applied, this only applies to tangible dangers like a snake’s venom, poison, and the like; however, with regards to fish and meat where the danger is not as great, one need not be more concerned than other actual prohibitions and a nullification by ratio of one to sixty is thoroughly sufficient.

Maran zt”l proceeds to quote the words of the Responsa Be’er Sheva (Chapter 38) who writes that the danger of consuming fish and meat together only exists in Babylon (Iraq) where the Sages of the Talmud resided, for the nature of the fish in this place was that it caused danger when eaten together with meat, as the Midrash states, “fish originating from Acco are not like fish originating from Spain” which seems to imply that the nature of the fish changes based on the waters of the specific country they come from. Although, halachically speaking, we prohibit mixtures of fish and meat from all countries, nevertheless, regarding the issue at hand where there was a nullification based on a ratio of one to sixty, there is room for leniency. Maran zt”l quotes many more of the great Rishonim and Acharonim who rule leniently regarding this issue, including the Sefer Issur Ve’Heter Ha’Aroch, Ohr Zarua, Kenesset Ha’Gedolah, Peri Chadash, and others.

Summary: Just as with regards to other prohibitions, as long as there is at least sixty times in the mixture against the prohibited item that fell into it, the entire mixture is permissible for consumption, the same applies to a mixture of fish and meat and if some drops of meat oil or gravy splashed into a pot of fish, the drops become nullified by a ratio of one to sixty and the fish remains permissible for consumption.

8 Halachot Most Popular

Shofar Blowing

There is a positive Torah commandment to hear the Shofar blasts on Rosh Hashanah, as the Torah states, “A day of blasts shall it be for you.” It is forbidden to speak between the various sets of Shofar blasts and this is certainly the case during the time the Shofar is actually being sou......

Read Halacha

 The “Shehecheyanu” Blessing

Our Sages teach us (Eruvin 40b) that one should recite the “Shehecheyanu” blessing upon seeing a new fruit that renews once a year. Even if one sees this fruit in the hands of another person or on the tree, one should recite the “Shehecheyanu” blessing. Nevertheless, the P......

Read Halacha

So that We May Refrain from the Injustice of Our Hands

During the Ne’ilah prayer, the prayer that culminates all the Days of Awe recited towards the conclusion of Yom Kippur, we state: “And You, Hashem our G-d, have given us this Yom Kippur etc. for pardon, forgiveness, and atonement so that we may refrain from the injustice of our hands and......

Read Halacha

Parashat Naso in the Diaspora

(From the teachings of Maran Rabbeinu Ovadia Yosef ztvk”l) (written by his grandson HaRav Yaakov Sasson Shlit”a) (translated by our dear friend Rav Daniel Levy Shlit”a, Leeds UK) Trading Places! The Parashah states, “The sacred offerings of each individual remain his ......

Read Halacha


Repenting for Speaking Lashon Hara and Rendering a Mistaken Halachic Ruling

Question: If I have spoken Lashon Hara (evil slander) about my friend, must I confront him and tell him what I have done in order to request his forgiveness? Also, what is the law regarding a rabbi who has ruled stringently on a matter when, in fact, there is actually room for leniency, must he ask ......

Read Halacha

Some Details Regarding the Prayers of the Days of Awe

“Hashem Wants Our Heart” One should try to focus as much as possible on one’s prayers throughout the year, especially during the Days of Awe, and not pray hastily, G-d-forbid. Rather, one should calmly, with utmost concentration, and in a supplicating manner. We must remember t......

Read Halacha

Rosh Hashanah Which Coincides With Shabbat

This coming year (5787), Rosh Hashanah will fall out this coming Shabbat and Sunday, G-d-willing. Let us discuss several unique laws relevant to this year. “Bameh Madlikin” When Rosh Hashanah coincides with Shabbat, Kabbalat Shabbat is recited before Arvit; however, the “Bameh ......

Read Halacha

Transferring Another’s Judgment Into the Hands of Heaven

Question: Is it correct that one may not transfer another’s judgment into the hands of Heaven, i.e. requesting that Hashem punish an individual who caused me harm if I am correct? Answer: When our matriarch Sarah saw that she was barren, she gave her maidservant, Hagar, to her husband Avrah......

Read Halacha