[Avodah] LBD Lists

[Isaac Balbin]

> This is not "for sure". The Sha'Kh in YD 117, has a long section where he 
> talks about someone eating in the home of some who has different minhagim 
> and goes by different pskei halakha. He does say "well, if you don't eat 
> something because of a minhag you can eat it at your host's house". He gives 
> conditions when you can eat the food and when you can't.
> 
> Ben
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Isaac Balbin" <Isaac.Balbin at rmit.edu.au>
>> 
>> We know, for sure, that when one is faced with a situation where one is 
>> eating in someone's house and the food may be kosher but not necessarily 
>> mehadrin that it's better to not insult the bein adom lamokom. I'm not 
>> aware that this requires hatoras nedarim either. Similarly in Hilchos 
>> Shabbos. If you go to a Sefardi house where they, for example, rely on Ain 
>> Bishul after Bishul even on a Davar Lach, and you are presented with 
>> something warmed and lach, that you are permitted to eat it, as I recall.
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 7
> Date: Tue, 08 Dec 2009 07:58:58 +0200
> From: Ben Waxman <ben1456 at zahav.net.il>
> 
> 
> Correction. The Sha"kh is in YD 119:19.

Thanks for that Sha"kh which I took to be YD:119:20

My reading of it would indicate that where the person has reason to think there is a "hetter" to be found in consuming food which he is not noheg to normally eat, and he normally resides in a place which isn't noheg to consume that food item and is now in a place that is noheg to consume that food item, that he is able to eat it? I take it then that the Sha"kh is saying that as long as the person doesn't simply hold that that food is "Assur" then it is ok to have it. He doesn't seem to require hatoras nedarim explicitly. I assume that this is because it can be assumed that the Neder Lechatchila (implicit) was bound/influenced by a locale/environment where it wasn't consumed but it never held that it was inherently Assur to eat (issur cheftza is limited to a geographical locale?). Accordingly, I would have assumed that if it's an ’approved as kosher' item, by an official and accepted list, but isn't listed as mehadrin by that same list/authority, then bemokom tzorech (such as Eyva --- yes, that word is sometimes used even with Yidden) one seemingly can eat the "plain" Kosher foods. Whether one could or could not would seem to depend on a din of Nedarim in the sense of what he (or his locale) may have had/have in mind. To be sure, for some people, it's almost Yehoreg Velo Ya'avor on any food that isn't "mehadrin". For such people, you are right that they wouldn't be permitted to eat there (and if the host knew this, the host must make sure not to feed them such food lest they be over lifnei iver). That being said, my point was premised on the notion that the list itself is the definition of hetter and within that list there are foods which have a different level of supervision (mehadrin). 

Maybe I hang around the wrong circles :-) but if I was at a friend's house and noticed, for example, that they had cooked their main dish with a tomato paste that was considered kosher but wasn't mehadrin-supervised (assume it's a case where it's not botel), that I wouldn't make them feel uncomfortable by not eating the dish they had prepared for me as their guest. 

Any of our resident Rabbonim have a view on this? Another item for me to look further into over summer (here in oz)


I've just remembered that there is also a Tshuva in the Tzitz Eliezer about eating those things which are "together" with a food that you wouldn't normally eat. Eg some cooked potatoes next lumped with something else you wouldn't normally eat. If my memory serves me correctly, he allows one to eat the potatoes. Yes, I know that's a different sheyla but it will have some good relevant discussion perhaps.