Is the prohibition against consuming meat and fish together considered d’rabbanan, minhag, or some other category? The main reason I ask is because the status of it binding can affect whether one is lenient or machmir.

  • 2
    It is sakana, which is more stringent than issur. S"A OC 173:2 although the M"A says it is no longer relevant nowadays, most poskim do not agree, see Darchei Teshuva YD 116:16.
    – Chatzkel
    Nov 15 at 20:14
  • I see. I haven’t seen any real scientific evidence meat and fish are unhealthy together so perhaps some may rely on the Magen Avraham’s heter but proper to be machmir because of tradition? @Chatzkel
    – Kirk
    Nov 15 at 20:16
  • 1
    I do not think chazal sakana are bound by what you have or have not seen based on "real" scientific evidence. Although I recall a question not too long ago asking about what exactly the davar acher is that they refer to and how it fits with current scientific thinking
    – Chatzkel
    Nov 15 at 20:18
  • 1
    @chatzkel "sakana" doesn't answer if it's derabanan or minhag or deorayta. Something actually dangerous is plausibly prohibited deorayta. Something that was once prohibited as dangerous but is not actually dangerous, at least anymore, is either permitted or prohibited as a lasting rabbinic decree or as a retained custom. Fish and meat is unquestionably in the latter group so we have to decide which vestigial aspects of the prohibition, if any, remain binding.
    – Double AA
    Nov 15 at 20:28
  • 1
    @Chatzkel Mishna Berurah quotes this Magen Avraham and leaves it at that, seemingly he is ruling like him.
    – user6591
    Nov 16 at 12:26


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .