What if, on Shabbos, it was not my intention to return the food
container to the heat source but I continued to hold it?
In the previous
shiur we learned that in order to return food to the heat source
there are five conditions that must be adhered to:
# 1 – The food must
be fully cooked.
# 2 – The food must
not have cooled down.
# 3 – The flame or
stove element must be covered with a blech or a Shabbos hotplate
must be utilized.
# 4 – The container
of food must be continuously held.
# 5 – There must be
the intent to return.
The first three
conditions cannot be compromised under any circumstance and food may
not be returned to the heat source. Conditions # 4 and # 5 are
negotiable, as follows:
if the original
intention was not to return the container to the blech or hotplate
but it has been held continuously it may be returned, if necessary.
What if the container was not held
continuously but the intention was to return it?
Here too, even
though condition # 4 was not complied with, it may be returned to
the blech or hotplate, provided that it was not placed on the floor
or in the refrigerator.
Why is it that these two conditions are
negotiable?
The first two
conditions are mandatory because they involve the prohibition of
cooking. Failing to comply will result in a melacha. The third
condition is stipulated by the gemora and hence agreed by all. The
latter two conditions deal with the rabbinical issue of chazora
– returning, where the central theme is ‘appearance’. It must appear
as if one is returning food to the heat source and not
placing it there for the first time (the concept known as mechzi
ki-mvashel).
But that does not explain why they are
negotiable?
There is a
machlokes Rishonim
as to whether these latter conditions exist. Several Rishonim
hold that one need not continuously hold the pot of food and if one
intended on returning it to the heat source one may do so. Other
Rishonim hold that one need not intend to return it to the heat
source, suffice if it was continuously held.
Seeing that the
issue involved is of rabbinic origin and not biblical and seeing
that there is a major dispute in the matter, the two latter
conditions are negotiable.
This does not mean
that one may l’chatchila remove food from the fire and put it
down on the counter, knowing that it may be returned. We must
l’chatchila adhere to all five conditions and only in a case
where b’diavad (post factum) they were not complied
with, may one be lenient, if necessary.
What if one did not intend to return the
container and it was put down?
The soup was
removed from the blech and placed on the countertop without the
intention of returning the container to the blech. Halfway through
serving the soup a household member decides that he would like soup
later on that night and requests the return of the pot of soup to
the blech.
According to the
Mishna Berura it may not be returned because he only permits
omitting one of the last two conditions, not both.
According to the
Mechaber (Sephardim) it may be returned. It is interesting to
note that the Kaf haChaim writes
that many tzadikkim would refrain from returning food to the
fire, for two reasons. Firstly, it might have cooled to less than
yad soledes bo and secondly, simple folk might learn that
chazora is permitted without realizing that there are conditions
that must be complied with.
It is important to
review these halachos with one’s household members.
What if one returned the food without
complying with the last 2 conditions?
In the above case
where there was no intention to return and it was placed on the
counter it may not be returned. If however one will not have hot
food for Shabbos one may return it to the heat source.
Also, if it was returned the food may be eaten.
There is room to
permit eating the food even when the pot was placed on the floor and
subsequently placed on the blech, provided that it had not
completely cooled down.
