Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

What is the basis for some people's practice not to eat the food at a shiva house; is there a halachik basis for this, is it a minhag or perhaps just superstition?

share|improve this question

Eating food at the Shivah House (not with the aveilim) is not a problem. It is brought down not to take food from a shivah house. (I need to re-find the source)

share|improve this answer
I remember as well that one should not take <b>anything</b> from a shiva house, food or otherwise. I also heard the reason for this: If you utilize the occasion to borrow or reclaim something, the Aveil may feel you came primarily for that purpose and not to console him. – Barry Apr 28 '10 at 20:52
@Yahu I heard this also, but do you know what the source is? – Hacham Gabriel Dec 23 '11 at 0:07
Presumably's @Barry's reason would apply to eating food there too. "He didn't come to console me. He came because he heard we were serving Chinese." – Ze'ev Felsen Sep 11 '13 at 19:05

There's a Rabbi Sobolofsky mp3 that says it's superstitious; there is one Talmudic quote where one sage says to another "what, you want to eat the food of mourners?". But that's not the law.

He did mention the concern that sadly, as shiva houses are open to many people and the hosts have their minds elsewhere, it's not unheard of for valuables to disappear. Hence a good policy not to walk out of a shiva house with your pockets bulging full of, well even if it's food they asked you to take.

share|improve this answer
Links to the above references would be great, particularly the mp3. – Double AA Aug 7 '12 at 3:38

It is brought down not to eat together with the aveilim.

share|improve this answer
Where is the source? – Bas613 Apr 27 '10 at 0:08
"Brought down" implies both a primary source and a "bringer". Who brings this down, and from where? – Seth J Aug 7 '12 at 1:20

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.