Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
10,446 bytes added ,  21:52, 5 December 2010
no edit summary
# The Rabbinic prohibition of Shehiya is to leave a pot of food that’s not cooked on a Kirah (stove) 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. </ref>
 ==For which foods?Different types of cooking appliances==# There’s A Kirah was a dispute stove in the Rishonim if one can do Shehiya only with food times of the Gemara which that is cooked fully (and if it’s continues had room to cook it worsens hold two pots on top (with the more it cooksheating element below) or . The Kirah is considered the most lenient of the stoves and it’s permissible if to leave food on it was cooked Machal Ben Dursai (a third on Shabbat by fulfilling one of five conditions: 1) The fire is covered 2) The food is considered totally cooked3). For Ashkenazim, the Minhag The food is to be lenient totally raw 4) The coals are removed 5) The fuel is straw, stubble or the like the latter opinion(which will be discussed below at length). For Sephardim, as long as it’s Machal Ben Dursai <ref> S”A 253:1 writes that a Kirah has the resemblance of a large pot and the food is going to be eaten has room for Shabbat day not Friday night one can do Shehiya. <Ref> two pots. The Mishna five leniencies listed are all sourced in the third perek S”A 253:1 but will be discussed below at length. See Laws of Shabbat (36bRabbi Shimon Eider; vol 4 pg 326) says that if for a description and pictures. </ref># A modern day gas stove is considered a Kirah (stove that’s made and so requires one of the five requirements to hold two pots (38b)be fulfilled, see further.) <ref> Sh”t Igrot Moshe 1:93 considers a modern day oven to be considered like a Kirah. This is heated with straw or stubblecodified in Orchot Shabbat (vol 1 pg 62), one can put on it food to cookShabbat Kitchen (pg 52), Laws of Shabbat (Rabbi Shimon Eider; vol 4 pg 327) who quotes Rav Moshe and Rav Henkin.. But if it’s heated with wood or olive peals </ref># A modern day oven is considered a Kirah (and so requires one can’t put on of the Kirah a food unless one made a recognizable sign five requirements to prevent one from stoking the coals on be fulfilled.) <ref> Sh”t Igrot Moshe 4:74:26 considers a modern day oven to be considered like a Kirah. So rules Orchot Shabbat by having the coals Garuf (shoveled out2:15, vol 1 pg 67) or Katum , Laws of Shabbat (covered with dustRabbi Shimon Eider; vol 4 pg 327). The Gemara , and Shabbat Kitchen (36bRabbi Simcha Bunim Cohen, pg 53) asks when the mishna says not to put . However, Sh”t Az Nidbaru 4:18 considers it be a food Tanur based on if heated by wood or olive peals (Lo Iten) whether the (Lo Yachzir) it’s forbids returning food to a stove on Shabbat and it’s totally heat of a modern oven. </ref> ==Covering the fire==# One is permitted to do Shehiyah leave food on before Shabbat a fire if there is a metal tray or rather (Lo Yish’heh) sheet to cover the fire of a regular gas stove. Some authorities add that it’s forbidden preferable to leave food on from before Shabbat unless it’s Garuf also cover the knobs (or Katum and certainly it’s forbidden to return food on Shabbatremove them). There are no clear proofs <Ref> *Magan Avraham 253:31 permits Shehiya in an oven because the Gemara concerning fire is covered by a cement or clay wall built into the Mishna but gives a few rulings oven based on the S”A 253:3 who permits leaving on the issue. The Gemara has two rulings like fire if there’s an empty vessel separating between the latter explanation, fire and then an opposing ruling supported by a Mishna which accords with the former explanation. Rif food. However, the Magan Avraham adds that based on the Maharil (16aMinhagei Maharil pg 36; see 318:15) rules like , Agudah, and Tashbetz 27 the latter interpretation and so unless the stove was Garuf or Katum one can’t leave flame must have some interposition such a food wooden plank that wasn’t totally cooked on the stove before Shabbatserves as a reminder besides being covered by metal. Rabbenu YonahThe Achronim unanimously agree including Eliyah Rabba 253:31, Shiltot (Shlach 128)Tosefet Shabbat 253:40, Rabbi Yehuda Barsiloni (Itim 19)Shulchan Aruch HaRav 253:26, Rambam (Shabbat 3Aruch HaShulchan 253:4)25, and Ramban (Milchamot 15bMishna Brurah 253:81, Chiddushim 37a D”H Mahu) concur with Rif and Chazon Ovadyah (16aShabbat 1 pg 50). Rashi (37b D”H VeRav Sheshet) rules like *According to this, a metal covering of the former interpretation because it’s supported by fire which also serves as a Mishnareminder would permit the fire to be used. Razah (15b D”H Ule’inyan)Therefore, Rosh (3Sh”t Igrot Moshe 1:1)93 writes that a gas stove when covered with a metal sheet, Tosfot (18b D”H Bashil)commonly referred to as a Blech, Rabbenu Chananel (quoted by Tosfot 37b D”H Amar)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, Ran (16b D”H Tu) in name of Rav Hai GoanSh”t Maharam Brisk 2:76, Rashba Sh”t Tefilah LeMoshe 1:37 (38a D”H VeHatemiha), Smag (Lav 65also recorded in Menuchat Ahava Ahava 3:131 in Rabbi Moshe HaLevi), Smak Shem Chadash (282 on Yereyim 1 pg 28558), Sefer HaTrumah (231)Kaf Hachaim 253:11, Hagot Maimon (Shabbat 3Sh”t Maharshag 2:2)50, Mordechai (Shabbat 3Sh”t Divrei Chizkiyah 1:299) 2 in name of Or Zaruha Mahari Shari, Sh”t Yaskil Avdi O”C 3:10(2), Sh”t Ohel Yosef (Erev Shabbat 8Rabbi Yosef Parid; Siman 10) concur with Rashi. S”A 253:1 quotes , Rav Vosner in Sh”t Shevet HaLevi 1:91, and Chazon Ovadyah (Shabbat 1 pg 50) concur. *[Chazon Ish 37:9 argues on the opinion of Rambam of Rif that if Mishna Brurah from Rashi (Shabbat 37a D”H Gaba; quoted by the stove isn’t Garuf or Katum one only it on from before Shabbat if it’s fully cooked Tur) who forbids a covering over an empty space and worsens as it cooks concludes that a covering that’s not normally used and then lowers the opinion heat of Rosh and Rashi that if it’s cooked Machal Ben Dursai one can leave it on from before Shabbatthe fire is considered a covering. Seemingly 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 S”A holds like Rif Chazon Ish that Rashi is referring to a cooking on Shabbat in a way that’s usual and Rambam since he wrote that opinion as so a covering it’s sufficient, however but by Shehiya one only needs a reminder not to stoke the anonymous first ruling coals and not like once it’s an unusual interposition it doesn’t need to lower the heat of the Rosh since he quotes it as “Yesh Omirim” (minority opinion)fire. Interestingly, Minchat Cohen See Bach 253:14 D”H VeDavka and Sh”t Maharam Shik O”C 117 who also make this distinction.]* Sh”t Igrot Moshe O”C 1:93, Sh”t Tzitz Eliezer 7:17(Mishmeret Shabbat 53) says that S”A really holds like Rosh because he didn’t make his opinion clear in 253:, Sh”t Bear Moshe vol 7, and Yalkut Yosef (Shabbat vol 1 but in 254:4 he rules on another issue in favor of the Rosh. However, Erech HaShulchan 253:3, Sh”t Shoel VeNishal pg 96) add that besides covering the flame it’s preferable to cover the knobs also. Orchot Shabbat (vol 12:369, 5:32pg 65), quotes Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach and Mishna Brurah Rav Elyashiv (Shaar Tzion 254:22 in name of Pri Megadimwho is also quoted by Hilchot Shabbat BeShabbato pg 197) argue who hold that 254:4 is a ruling that everyone would agree to and so covering of the knobs isn’t necessary if the Minchat Cohen has no prooffire is covered. There are </ref># Some consider a hotplate or Plaata a few approaches in the Achronim covered fire and consider it an uncovered fire. <ref> *Reasons to be lenient on this issue. Firstlyforbid a Plaata: 1) Sh”t Yaskil LeAvdi O”C 5:34, Rama 2536:1 says that the Minhag 15 is to be lenient like by a covered stove since the Rosh. Sh”t Rashbatz 8 defends the Minhag to leave food that was cooked Machal Ben Dursai on cover is a stove not Garuf or Katum because of separate piece but a Safek Safeka whether halacha Plaata is entirely like Rosh a coal and even if not there are opinions there’s nothing covering it (S”A 253:1 rules 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 can’t do Shehiya with something directly touching the coals). [Shibolei HaLeket 57 *2) Sh”t Yaskil Avdi ibid. adds that there’s an issue that one may come to plug it in name of Rabbenu Simcha says that Shehiya is permitted if because it’s so easy unlike lighting a person has two pots and flame anew which the Rabbi’s didn’t make a Gezerah because it requires preparation and by that time one that’s cooking for will remember it’s Shabbat day is separate from the pot cooking for Friday night. Rabbenu Binyamin (quoted by Shibolei HaLeket)[Later on, Mordechai he retracted because the Minhag was to use it, see Sh”t Yaskil LeAvdi O”C 7:28(Shabbat 38).] Arguments to permit a Plaata:300*1), Rabbenu Yishaya HaRishon Chazon Ovadyah (Shabbat Bameh Tomnin1 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 Ravan Netivei Am (Shabbat 338pg 120-1) concerning Hatmana allow something that is set aside for argue on the next day. However Bet second reason, based on Sh”t Maharam Provinsal 46, and Birkei Yosef 253339:1(4) concludes 7 who write that this seemingly goes against many 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 Mefarshim that are brought in Gezerah of the following Siman.] Even though seemingly Bet Yosef should disagree with this idea of the RashbetzRabbis on what they didn’t just because it’s easy to come to do a Melacha. [Similarly, nonetheless, Bet Yosef 253:1Rosh (3Shabbat 24a) himself writes such a defense , Magid Mishna (Chol HaMoad 5:20), Sh”t Rivash 390 in name of the Minhag because of the opinion of Rashi Ran, Radvaz (Trumot 1:22; Sh”t Radvaz 1:149), and Bet Yosef (O”C 462) say that nowadays the possibility Rabbis can’t enact new Gezerah’s not enacted by Chazal.] *3) Chazon Ovadyah explains that one it should be permissible since a flame is allowed to do Shehiya for Shabbat dayconsistent (unlike coals that flicker) and the heat can’t be changed. Birkei Yosef This reason is also found is Gedolei Tzion 9:11, Mishna Brurah (Buir Halacha 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 D”H Afilu), Sh”t Tzitz Eliezer 7:16(S”A 2543), Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 1:1) to the pot so it’s clear that the pot is cooking for the next day. Sh”t Zechur LeYitzchak 25, and Rav Yosef Kapach (O”C commentary on Rambam Shabbat 3 pg 74 pg 113a) writes in name of Maharam Ben Chaviv that we are lenient like the Minhag against S”A, . *Halacha: Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 1:25 for a plaata which Zechur LeYitzchak explains that since one can’t change it’s temperature and it’s not usually used for cooking is considered a Minhag from before S”A covered fire 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 rulingdoesn’t require another covering. So holds Rav Moshe in Sh”t Ginat Veradim 3Igrot Moshe 4:474:35 (who emphasizes that it must be impossible to cook on it), Sh”t Pirchei Cohen O”C 34Rav Vosner (MeBeyt Levi vol 6, Sh”t Divrei Chizkiya O”C 1:laws of Shehiya #2, Yashkil Avdi O”D 3) Chazon Ovadyah (vol 1 pg 52), Or Letzion (vol 2, 17:10, 1) and Sh”t Vayomer Moshe O”C 3 concur based on minhag. Shabbat Kitchen (pg 52). * However Sh”t Shoel VeNishal 1, Orchot Shabbat (2:3613, 5:36 argues that the Minhag is based on lack of knowledge vol 1 pg 66) and incorrect practices and so shouldn’t be kept. Nonetheless, Chazon Ovadyah (Shabbat 1 pf 48Otzrot HaShabbat (pg 100) concludes based quotes Rav Elyashiv who requires a covering of thick aluminum even on the minhag and Safek Safeka of the Rashbetz a Kirah that a Plaata which one can leave a food cooked Machal Ben Dursai on a stove that’s not Garuf or Katumcan’t change its temperature. </ref># An oven is considered an uncovered fire unless one places a metal 4 sided box into the oven to interpose between the walls and the pot of food to serve as a reminder and some disagree holding that it’s an uncovered fire under all circumstances. <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). * Sh”t Igrot Moshe 4:74:26 considers a modern day oven to be considered like a Kirah. * Seemingly there’s no simple way to make an interposition for the oven in order to leave food in it before Shabbat. However, Sh”t Igrot Moshe 4:74:27 considers a metal 4 sided box to be an adequate cover and recognition. So rules the Shabbat Kitchen. * However, the Sh”t Minchat Yitzchak 3:28(1) writes that an oven has the status of an uncovered fire even if there metal interposition based on Chazon Ish 37:11 who holds that an empty pot isn’t considered a covering (see above where many disagree with the Chazon Ish). </ref>  ==Cooked food==# 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), Hagot 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 (Buir 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># Cooked food (according to Ashkenazim, half cooked and Sephardim, fully cooked, as above) may be left in an oven before Shabbat in it is on a Shabbat setting, meaning that opening the door will not activate the oven to become heated. <Ref> Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata 1:17 in the note, Orchot Shabbat (2:15 pg 67). It seems that Sh”t Igrot Moshe 4:74:26 agrees. </ref># Some consider Machal Ben Dursai to be half cooked and some a third cooked. Therefore one shouldn’t leave food on the fire from before Shabbat unless it’s half cooked, however if it’s a third cooked there’s room to be lenient. <Ref> Mishna Brurah 253:38 </ref># According to Sephardim, even completely cooked foods can’t be left on the fire unless it also worsens the more it cooks. The general rule is that any food that has flour in it is in the category of foods that worsen the more they cook, however, cabbage, beans, small pieces of meat, and egg are in the category of food for which it’s beneficial to continue cooking. If there’s a doubt considered whether something worsens or benefits from continued cooked one should be careful. <Ref> Buir Halacha 253:1 D”H VeHu, Laws of Shabbat (Rabbi Shimon Eider vol 4 pg 344) </ref> ==Leaving raw food on the fire==# If the food cooking is raw meat or there’s a piece of raw meat in a the food it’s permitted to leave it on the fire from before Shabbat. <Ref> S”A 253:1 writes that if the food is raw or there’s a piece of raw food in a pot it’s permissible to leave the food on the fire from before Shabbat. Mishna Brurah 253:9 specifies a piece of meat. So rules Laws of Shabbat  ==Removing the coals==
==With what stoves and how are they heated?==
# Fires A Kirah fueled with olive peals, wood chips, dung of large animals, or charcoal need to be Garuf and Katum in order to leave something not cooked upon it, however, if the Kirah is fueled with straw or stubble, one may leave not cooked food on it. <Ref> The Mishna (Shabbat 36b and S”A differentiate ) differentiates between a Kirah heated by stubble and straw which don’t make coals (that can later be stoked) and a Kirah heated by olive peals, wood chips that make coals. The Tur and S”A 253:1 rule that one may leave not cooked food on a Kirah fueled by straw or stubble but if was fueled with olive peals or wood chips it’s forbidden unless the food is cooked. Mishna Brurah 253:4 in name of the Kol Bo includes charcoal in the second category of fuels. [Rambam (Shabbat 3:4) includes dung of small animals in the same category as straw and stubble, implying that dung of large animals is the category of olive peals and wood chips. However, Bet Yosef 253:1 (D”H Umasha Katuv VeIm Husaka BeKash) writes that our girsa of the Yerushalmi is that dung of small animals is included in the category of olive peals and woods. The Kolbo (Siman 31, pg 31c) also had the girsa differently from the Rambam. Mishna Brurah 253:4 rules like Rambam that dung of large animals is included in the category of olive peals and wood chips. ] </ref># There’s a dispute whether our stoves nowadays fueled by oil also have the issue of Shehiya or not. Because of the old Minhag to be lenient one has what to rely on to leave food on a gas fire if the food is cooked [[Machal Ben Dursai]] and the food is meant to be eaten the Shabbat day and not that night. <Ref> Our stove nowadays fueled with gas or oil which don’t leave over coals seemingly shouldn’t be included in the laws of Shehiya. However some argue that since the flame that can be raised it’s forbidden because of the Gezerah just like a fire fueled with wood chips. Sh”t Panim Meirot 1:84 says a portable stovetop with a real flame fueled by alcohol which can be raised by manipulation is forbidden because of the Gezerah. Sh”t Maharsham 3:165, Sh”t Amrei Yosher 2:171, Sh”t Maharam Brisk 2:76, Sh”t Esei HaLevanon O”C 11, Sh”t Shoel VeNishal 1:36, Sh”t Vayomer Boaz 18, Sh”t Divrei Chizkiya 1:2 pg 12 quoting Mahari Sharim, and Shaarei Teshuva 254 :7 (D”H Mipneh) concur. [Biur Halacha 253:1 Afilu Eina Garufa who is in doubt whether it’s permissible to leave food on a Kirah that’s heated by straw and stubble only if the straw and stubble have been consumed prior to Shabbat or it’s permissible even if there’s a lot of fuel to last a long time. If so, it seems clear that the same doubt would apply to the case of a flame continuously fueled by oil.]Second source to forbid: Bear Yitzchak (Introduction to Kodshim) writes that he asked the Goan MeBrisk about leaving a container of water by an oil stove and he was answered that it’s totally forbidden as by the hot water container mentioned in Yerushalmi (Shabbat 3:3e), that forbids it since the walls of the container remain hot. Bear Yitzchak continues that Rav Zonenfeld asked Rav Yacov Elishor why he didn’t protest the Minhag some Sephardim had to leave a container of water by an oil stove and was answered that he didn’t have the power to protest this bad Minhag. Those who don’t apply the Gezerah to a modern stove: 1)Sh”t Maharshag 2:50 argues that since Chazal didn’t make a Gezerah about the case of a flame fueled by oil we shouldn’t make a Gezerah. Chazon Ovadyah (Shabbat 1 pg 48) quotes Yadei Chaim pg 200 who explains that even if something is very similar to a modern example we can’t extend the Gezerot of Chazal like the Rishonim were able to, thus modern day stoves such be permissible. Sh”t Tzitz Eliezer 2:7 (quoting Rav Tzvi Peasch Frank) based on a Yerushalmi (Shevit 2:4) concurs. 2) Sh”t Igrot Moshe O”C 1:93 distinguishes between stoking the coals for which the Rabbis made a Gezerah and adding more fuel which the rabbis didn’t make a Gezerah, and so a oil stove isn’t an issue of stoking coals and the issue of increasing the fire is permitted. This idea is applied elsewhere in Sh”t Yacheve Daat 6:20. 3) Additionally, Gedolei Tzion 9:11 (quoted by Sh”t Tzitz Eliezer 7:16(3) and Sh”t Yachave Daat 6:20) and Sh”t Kochavei Yitzchak 3:37(4) say that the Gezerah only applies to coals which constantly flicker and get close to going out, but an oil stove where the fire is constant there shouldn’t be a Gezerah. Sh”t Tzitz Eliezer 7:15(3) writes that even the Chazon Ish (Sefer Moed Siman 37) who forbids a modern stove by Chazarah didn’t even entertain the idea of forbidding it for Shehiyah. Rejection of the second source: On the other hand, Chazon Ovadyah (Shabbat 1 pg 49) rejects the proof from the Yerushlami based on Ritva (Shabbbat 41a; I searched and was unable to find this Ritva, but found it that quote in the Chiddushei Ran), who explains that water that’s totally cooked is even allowed to be left on a Kirah or a Tanur but the problem of a water container is that it was made of metal pieces and if the water evaporates one may come to add more water in fear that the fire will make the container fall apart. So writes Maginei Shlomo (Shabbat 41a) in name of Rashi. Chazon Ovadyah concludes that had Rav Yacov Elishor seen the Ritva and Poskim who permit he would have rejoiced to defend the Minhag! Sh”t Tzitz Eliezer 7:15(1) (quoting Sh”t Maharsham 3:165) also rejects the proof from the Yerushalmi because we don’t pasken like the Yerushalmi since it’s not mentioned in the Bavli. </ref> ==Covering the fire==# One is permitted to leave food on a fire if there is a tray or metal sheet to cover the fire. Some hold that it’s preferable to also cover the knobs. <Ref> Magan Avraham 253:31 permits Shehiya in modern day ovens because the fire is covered based on S”A 253:3 permits leaving on the fire if there’s an empty vessel separating between the fire and the food. This leniency is sourced in the Maharil (Minhagei Maharil pg 36; see 318:15), Agudah, and Tashbetz 27 in name of Maharam MeRotenberg. Eliyah Rabba 253:31, Tosefet Shabbat 253:40, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 253:26, Mishna Brurah 253:81, and Chazon Ovadyah (Shabbat 1 pg 50). Chazon Ovadyah extends this to a stove and so one can cover the stove flame with a metal sheet based on Rashba and Ramban (Shabbat 36b) that partial covering of a fire is sufficient. Sh”t Zera Emet O”C 26, Sh”t Maharam Brisk 2:76, Sh”t Tefilah LeMoshe 1:37, 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 Yashkil Avdi O”C 3:10(2), and Sh”t Ohel Yosef Parid 10 concur. Sh”t Igrot Moshe O”C 1:93 and Sh”t Tzitz Eliezer 7:17(3) adds that besides covering the flame it’s preferable to cover the knobs also. However Chazon Ish 37:9 argues on the Mishna Brurah from Rashi (Shabbat 37a D”H Gaba; quoted by Tur) who requires a covering over an empty space. Thus, a covering on our modern stove would still be forbidden. Chazon Ovadyah (pg 51), Sh”t Shevet Levi O”C 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 unusual and so it would need to be a covering over an empty space but by Shehiya one only needs a reminder not to stoke the coals. See Bach 253:14 D”H VeDavka and Sh”t Maharam Shik O”C 117 who also make this distinction. </ref>
==SourcesReferences==
<references/>

Navigation menu