Shehiya: Difference between revisions

# The Rabbinic prohibition of Shehiya is to leave a pot of food that’s not cooked on a Kirah (double burner stove<ref> [[Shabbos]] 38b</ref>) from before [[Shabbat]] because one might come to stoke the coals. <Ref> S”A 253:1 based on Mishna [[Shabbat]] 36b with Rashi that the prohibition is based on stoking the coals (Quoting the gemorah on 34b), Rashi mentions that there is an additional issue of 'Mosif Hevel (Adding heat, which is normally associated with the rabbinic prohibition of Hatmanah) though Tosfos and many others call into question. </ref>

# One is permitted to leave food on a fire if there is a metal tray or sheet to cover the fire of a regular gas stove. Some authorities add that it’s preferable to also cover the knobs (or remove them). <Ref>  

*Magan Avraham 253:31 permits Shehiya in an oven because the fire is covered by a cement or clay wall built into the oven based on the S”A 253:3 who permits leaving on the fire if there’s an empty vessel separating between the fire and the food. However, the Magan Avraham adds that based on the Maharil (Minhagei Maharil pg 36; see 318:15), Agudah, and Tashbetz 27 the flame must have some interposition such a wooden plank that serves as a reminder besides being covered by metal. The Achronim unanimously agree including Eliyah Rabba 253:31, Tosefet [[Shabbat]] 253:40, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 253:26, Aruch HaShulchan 253:25, Mishna Brurah 253:81, and Chazon Ovadyah ([[Shabbat]] 1 pg 50).  

*According to this, a metal covering of the fire which also serves as a reminder would permit the fire to be used. Therefore, Sh”t Igrot Moshe 1:93 writes that a gas stove when covered with a metal sheet, commonly referred to as a Blech, is like a covered Kirah and is permissible. So holds Shemirat [[Shabbat]] KeHilchata 1:63 and specifies that the cover should be something that’s not usually used such as asbestos. Sh”t Zera Emet O”C 253:26, Sh”t Maharam Brisk 2:76, Sh”t Tefilah LeMoshe 1:37 (also recorded in Menuchat Ahava Ahava 3:1 in Rabbi Moshe HaLevi), Shem Chadash (on Yereyim 1 pg 58), Kaf Hachaim 253:11, Sh”t Maharshag 2:50, Sh”t Divrei Chizkiyah 1:2 in name of Mahari Shari, Sh”t Yaskil Avdi O”C 3:10(2), Sh”t Ohel Yosef (Rabbi Yosef Parid; Siman 10), Rav Vosner in Sh”t Shevet HaLevi 1:91, and Chazon Ovadyah ([[Shabbat]] 1 pg 50) concur.  

*[Chazon Ish 37:9 argues on the Mishna Brurah from Rashi ([[Shabbat]] 37a D”H Gaba; quoted by the Tur) who forbids a covering over an empty space and concludes that a covering that’s not normally used and lowers the heat of the fire is considered a covering. Thus, a covering on our modern stove wouldn’t be sufficient. Chazon Ovadyah (vol 1 pg 51), Sh”t Shevet Levi O”C 1:91, Toldot Zev ([[Shabbat]] 2 pg 192) argue on the Chazon Ish that Rashi is referring to a [[cooking]] on [[Shabbat]] in a way that’s usual and so a covering it’s sufficient, however but by Shehiya one only needs a reminder not to stoke the coals and once it’s an unusual interposition it doesn’t need to lower the heat of the fire. See Bach 253:14 D”H VeDavka and Sh”t Maharam Shik O”C 117 who also make this distinction.]

# Some consider a hotplate or Plaata a covered fire and consider it an uncovered fire. <ref> *Reasons to forbid a Plaata: 1) Sh”t Yaskil LeAvdi O”C 5:34, 6:15 is lenient by a covered stove since the cover is a separate piece but a Plaata is entirely like a coal and there’s nothing covering it (S”A 253:1 rules that one can’t do Shehiya with something directly touching the coals). *2) Sh”t Yaskil Avdi ibid. adds that there’s an issue that one may come to plug it in because it’s so easy unlike lighting a flame anew which the Rabbi’s didn’t make a Gezerah because it requires preparation and by that time one will remember it’s [[Shabbat]]. [Later on, he retracted because the Minhag was to use it, see Sh”t Yaskil LeAvdi O”C 7:28(8).] Arguments to permit a Plaata: *1) Chazon Ovadyah ([[Shabbat]] 1 pg 52) argues on the first reason because by a Plaata the heat comes from electric current under the metal sheet and so it’s like a covered flame. *2) Chazon Ovadyah and Netivei Am (pg 120-1) argue on the second reason, based on Sh”t Maharam Provinsal 46, and Birkei Yosef 339:7 who write that there’s no Gezerah of coming to write by composing a song as there’s a Gezerah by doing a business transaction because it may come to writing because we don’t extend the Gezerah of the Rabbis on what they didn’t just because it’s easy to come to do a Melacha. [Similarly, Rosh ([[Shabbat]] 24a), Magid Mishna (Chol HaMoad 5:20), Sh”t Rivash 390 in name of Ran, Radvaz (Trumot 1:22; Sh”t Radvaz 1:149), and Bet Yosef (O”C 462) say that nowadays the Rabbis can’t enact new Gezerah’s not enacted by Chazal.] *3) Chazon Ovadyah explains that it should be permissible since a flame is consistent (unlike coals that flicker) and the heat can’t be changed. This reason is also found is Gedolei Tzion 9:11, Mishna Brurah (Beiur Halacha 253:1 D”H Afilu), Sh”t Tzitz Eliezer 7:16(3), Shemirat [[Shabbat]] KeHilchata 1:25, and Rav Yosef Kapach (commentary on Rambam [[Shabbat]] 3 pg 74).  

*Halacha: Shemirat [[Shabbat]] KeHilchata 1:25 for a plaata which one can’t change it’s temperature and it’s not usually used for [[cooking]] is considered a covered fire and doesn’t require another covering. So holds Rav Moshe in Sh”t Igrot Moshe 4:74:35 (who emphasizes that it must be impossible to cook on it), Rav Vosner (MeBeyt Levi vol 6, laws of Shehiya #2) Chazon Ovadyah (vol 1 pg 52), Or Letzion (vol 2, 17:1) and [[Shabbos]] Kitchen (pg 52).  

* However, Orchot [[Shabbat]] (2:13, vol 1 pg 66) and Otzrot Ha[[Shabbat]] (pg 100) quotes Rav Elyashiv who requires a covering of thick aluminum even on a Plaata which one can’t change its temperature. </ref>

*Magan Avraham 253:31 permits Shehiya in an oven because the fire is covered by a cement or clay wall built into the oven based on the S”A 253:3 who permits leaving on the fire if there’s an empty vessel separating between the fire and the food. However, the Magan Avraham adds that based on the Maharil (Minhagei Maharil pg 36; see 318:15), Agudah, and Tashbetz 27 the flame must have some interposition such a wooden plank that serves as a reminder besides being covered by metal. The Achronim unanimously agree including Eliyah Rabba 253:31, Tosefet [[Shabbat]] 253:40, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 253:26, Aruch HaShulchan 253:25, Mishna Brurah 253:81, and Chazon Ovadyah ([[Shabbat]] vol 1 pg 50).  

# From before [[Shabbat]], one may leave cooked food on an uncovered fire, Sephardim hold that the food must be fully cooked and worsens the more it cooks. However, according to Ashkenazic minhag, it’s permissible if it was cooked Machal Ben Dursai (half way). Nonetheless, Sephardim may be lenient to consider it as cooked from once it’s Machal Ben Dursai if the food is going to be eaten for [[Shabbat]] day and not Friday night. <Ref> The Mishna in the third perek of [[Shabbat]] (36b) says that if a Kirah (stove that’s made to hold two pots (38b)) is heated with straw or stubble, one can put food on it to cook. But if it’s heated with wood or olive peals one can’t put food on the Kirah unless one made a recognizable sign to prevent one from stoking the coals on [[Shabbat]] by having the coals Garuf (shoveled out) or Katum (covered with dust). * The Gemara (36b) asks when the mishna says not to put a food on a fire if it is heated by wood or olive peals (Lo Iten) whether it forbids returning food to a stove on [[Shabbat]] (Lo Yachzir) but it would be totally permitted to do Shehiyah (leaving food on the fire from before [[Shabbat]]) or rather it’s forbidden to leave food on from before [[Shabbat]] unless it’s Garuf or Katum (Lo Yish’heh) and certainly it’s forbidden to return food on [[Shabbat]]. There are no clear proofs in the Gemara concerning the Mishna but gives a few rulings on the issue. The Gemara has two rulings like the latter explanation, and then an opposing ruling supported by a Mishna which accords with the former explanation. * The Rif (16a) rules like the latter interpretation and so unless the stove was Garuf or Katum one can’t leave a food that wasn’t totally cooked on the stove before [[Shabbat]]. The Rambam ([[Shabbat]] 3:4), Rabbenu Yonah, Shiltot (Shlach 128), Rabbi Yehuda Barsiloni (Itim 19), and Ramban (Milchamot 15b, Chiddushim 37a D”H Mahu) concur with Rif (16a). However, Rashi (37b D”H VeRav Sheshet) rules like the former interpretation because it’s supported by a Mishna. The Rosh ([[Shabbat]] 3:1), Baal HaMoer (15b D”H Ule’inyan), Tosfot (18b D”H Bashil), Rabbenu Chananel (quoted by Tosfot 37b D”H Amar), Ran (16b D”H Tu) in name of Rav Hai Goan, Rashba (38a D”H VeHatemiha), Smag (Lav 65:13), Smak (282 pg 285), Sefer HaTrumah (231), Hagahot Maimon ([[Shabbat]] 3:2), and Mordechai ([[Shabbat]] 3:299) in name of Or Zaruha (Erev [[Shabbat]] 8) concur with Rashi. * S”A 253:1 quotes the opinion of Rambam of Rif that if the stove isn’t Garuf or Katum one may not leave food on it from before [[Shabbat]] unless it’s fully cooked and worsens as it cooks and then the opinion of Rosh and Rashi that if it’s cooked Machal Ben Dursai one can leave it on from before [[Shabbat]]. Seemingly the S”A holds like Rif and Rambam since he wrote that opinion as the anonymous first ruling and only quotes the Rosh as a “Yesh Omirim” (minority opinion). Interestingly, Minchat Cohen (Mishmeret [[Shabbat]] 5) says that S”A really holds like Rosh because he didn’t make his opinion clear in 253:1 but in 254:4 he rules on another issue in favor of the Rosh. However, Erech HaShulchan 253:3, Sh”t Shoel VeNishal (1:36, 5:32), and Mishna Brurah (Shaar Tzion 254:22 in name of Pri Megadim) argue that 254:4 is a ruling that everyone would agree to and so the Minchat Cohen has no proof. There are a few approaches in the Achronim to be lenient on this issue. * Firstly, Rama 253:1 says that the Minhag is to be lenient like the Rosh. Mishna Brurah (Beiur Halacha D”H VeNehagu writes that preferably one should be strict like S”A.) Therefore according to Ashkenazim, Shemirat [[Shabbat]] KeHilchata 1:63 rules that one may be lenient to leave food on an uncovered fire if the food is Machal Ben Dursai before [[Shabbat]] as long as one doesn’t intend of returning the food to the fire on [[Shabbat]] (if removed). For Sephardim, Sh”t Zechur LeYitzchak (O”C 74 pg 113a) writes in name of Maharam Ben Chaviv that Sephardim may be lenient against S”A, since it’s a Minhag from before S”A and there’s an mitzvah of Oneg [[Shabbat]] to have hot food on [[Shabbat]]. Eretz Chaim (Klal 7) supports the Zechur LeYitzchak with the Shach Y”D 242 who says a Minhag can rely a Yesh Omrim against the anonymous ruling. Sh”t Ginat Veradim 3:4, Sh”t Pirchei Cohen O”C 34, Sh”t Divrei Chizkiya O”C 1:2, Yashkil Avdi O”D 3:10, and Sh”t Vayomer Moshe O”C 3 concur based on minhag. However, Sh”t Shoel VeNishal 1:36, 5:36 argues that the Minhag is based on lack of knowledge and incorrect practices and so shouldn’t be kept. * Secondly, Sh”t Rashbatz 8 defends the Minhag to leave food that was cooked Machal Ben Dursai on a stove not Garuf or Katum because of a Safek Safeka whether halacha is like Rosh and even if not there are opinions that one can be lenient if the food is only going to be eaten [[Shabbat]] day because then there isn’t a concern of coming to stoke the coals. [Shibolei HaLeket 57 in name of Rabbenu Simcha says that Shehiya is permitted if a person has two pots and the one that’s [[cooking]] for [[Shabbat]] day is separate from the pot [[cooking]] for Friday night. Rabbenu Binyamin (quoted by Shibolei HaLeket), Mordechai ([[Shabbat]] 3:300), Rabbenu Yishaya HaRishon ([[Shabbat]] Bameh Tomnin), and Raavan ([[Shabbat]] 338) concerning [[Hatmana]] allow something that is set aside for the next day. However Bet Yosef 253:1(4) concludes that this seemingly goes against many of the Mefarshim that are brought in the following Siman.] Even though seemingly Bet Yosef should disagree with this idea of the Rashbetz, nonetheless, Bet Yosef 253:1(3) himself writes such a defense of the Minhag because of the opinion of Rashi and the possibility that one is allowed to do Shehiya for [[Shabbat]] day. Birkei Yosef 253:1 writes the same in the name of his grandfather and adds that’s it’s better to satisfy all opinions by adding a piece of raw meat (S”A 254:1) to the pot so it’s clear that the pot is [[cooking]] for the next day. Nonetheless, Chazon Ovadyah ([[Shabbat]] 1 pg 48) concludes based on the minhag and Safek Safeka of the Rashbetz a Kirah that one can leave a food cooked Machal Ben Dursai on a stove that’s not Garuf or Katum if the food is meant for the [[Shabbat]] day. </ref>