Shulchan Aruch: Chapter 257 - Laws Governing Insulating Warm Food

Tomein, the root of that term, means “hide” or “engulf.” In Talmudicterminology, it refers to insulating food to preserve its heat and even – when the insulating agent serves as a source of heat – to complete its cooking process. Our Sages forbade hatmanah, “the hiding,” of food in materials that increase the heat of the food. They allowed, however, hatmanah in materials that maintain the heat of the food under certain conditions. The entire section deals with defining the permitted and prohibited manners of hatmanah.

Shabbos 47b. This restriction applies even when the food was already cooked to the extent of maachal ben Derusai’i.

Ibid., 34b.

Even partially, see subsection 10 below and sec. 253:10.

In contrast to ash, whose coals have entirely burnt out (see sec. 6).

I.e., the embers that remain from the fuel used to heat the range after they have already burned for some time.

See Shabbos 38b; 39b. There are other authorities who rule that if one forgot the prohibition and insulated food, it is permitted after the fact. Nevertheless, the Alter Rebbe does not accept this leniency.

See sec. 253:10. Ketzos HaShulchan, sec. 71 (Badei HaShulchan 28), maintains that on Saturday night one must wait until the food could have warmed (bechedai sheyasu), as stated in sec. 253, loc. cit. See Shabbos KeHalachah, ch. 11, biurim 4, which discusses this issue, and while offering many rationales to rule stringently, also quotes the Yeshuas Yaakov 257:2, which maintains that the food is permitted immediately on Saturday night.

Tehilah LeDavid 257:1 states that this stringency applies even if the food could have been eaten while cold.

The fact that the food remains hot is not considered beneficial, because it could have remained hot even if it were insulated in a material that does not increase its heat. Since the person does not derive benefit from the violation of the prohibition, there is no concern that perhaps he will violate it again in the future.

See sec. 253:1.

Half-cooked (or after the fact, one-third-cooked) as stated in 253:1, 13.

I.e., standing in open space on the range, without insulation.

This decree applies even when further cooking will be detrimental to the food (mitztamek vira lo). Since the person desires that the food remain hot, he is willing to sacrifice a slight reduction in the flavor of the food. Therefore, there is reason for concern that he might stir the coals.

Sec. 253:8.

Since there is no way it will be ready for the evening meal if it was entirely raw directly before Shabbos.

Thus there are two distinctions between food that is left on a range (shi’ah) and food that is insulated in a source that increases its temperature (hatmanah bedavar hamosif hevel):

a) Generally, one would leave food on a range for the sake of its being eaten that night. As such, since it was already cooked to the extent of maachal ben Derusai’i before Shabbos, it is unlikely that one will stir the coals to further warm it. In contrast, one generally insulates food for the following day, and in such an instance, there is a possibility that one may stir the coals.

b) Even if one leaves food on the range for the following day, it is not likely that he will stir the coals, because the food will cook regardless and stirring will not be effective in increasing its heat. In contrast, when food is insulated, the small increase in heat will be preserved and be effective.

I.e., according to these authorities, there is no difference between leaving food on a range (shi’ah) and insulating food in a source that increases its temperature (hatmanah bedavar hamosif hevel).

Shabbos 34a. I.e., pillows, blankets, and the like. If, on Shabbos, a person transgresses and insulates food – even hot food – in a material that does not increase its temperature, it is permitted to partake of it on Shabbos (Magen Avraham 257:6). Tehilah LeDavid 257:3 notes that the Alter Rebbe does not quote the leniency stated by Magen Avraham. Nevertheless, Shabbos KeHalachah 11:33 maintains that he would accept this ruling.

The time between the setting of the sun and the appearance of the stars. There is an unresolved halachicquestionwhether this time is considered part of the day or part of the night. Thus, its status is in doubt.

And thus, by and large, the prohibitions that apply on Shabbos itself, also apply. See sec. 261:1-2.

Shabbos, loc. cit. This leniency applies provided one did not formally accept Shabbos, as women do by lighting Shabbos candles.

In his Kuntreis Acharon (note 2) and his summary of the laws of shi’ah and hatmanah that appears after sec. 259, the Alter Rebbe emphasizes that the concept of hatmanah does not apply unless the walls of a pot are entirely covered. Nevertheless, in his Mahadura Basra to sec. 259, he emphasizes that the fundamental aspect of hatmanah bedavar she’eino mosif hevel is covering the opening of the pot. Based on those statements, Badei HaShulchan 71:34 suggests that even covering just the top of a closed pot with a container can be considered as hatmanah.

Shabbos 47b.

Rashi, Shabbos 47b, states that when these wastes are collected, they are very warm.

Salt, lime, and sand are not hot, but when food is buried in them, they increase its heat.

I.e., naturally moist or moistened by water (Meiri, Shabbos 47b). All the above materials are warmer when moist than when dry (Rashi, loc. cit.).

There are authorities who rule stringently with regard to pillows filled with cotton that have become wet, maintaining that the fact the moist cotton is wrapped in a cover does not prevent its heat from affecting the food. See Shabbos KeHalachah, ch. 11, biurim 8*.

If the clothing is made from cotton, one should be sure that it is dry. See Shabbos KeHalachah 11:12.

I.e., whether moist or dry.

Sefer HaTerumah, sec. 231, the source for this ruling, mentions discovering the burning embers on the Shabbos day. Nimukei Shabbos argues that the same principle should also apply for the night meal.

See Bava Basra 19a.

See Shabbos KeHalachah, ch. 11, biurim 8, which questions the addition of the phrase “when they increase [the food’s] temperature,” for seemingly, our Sages’ decree should also apply to materials that do not increase the food’s temperature if they are used to insulate foods on Shabbos itself. Nimukei Shabbos, however, explains that there is no difficulty with the Alter Rebbe’s wording, for this subsection deals with insulating food on Friday.

This stringency applies even if only the top of the pot became uncovered, since, as stated in subsection 4, the covering of the top of the pot is of primary significance.

The word HaShabbos is surrounded by parentheses, indicating that the Alter Rebbe equivocated regarding which term to use and left the matter unresolved. Shabbos KeHalachah, ch. 11, note 83, offers the interpretation that according to the version that states HaShabbos, it is possible that a person who accepted Shabbos early would be allowed to reinsulate a pot whose coverings fell off between his acceptance of Shabbos and nightfall.

Shabbos 51a.

Tehilah LeDavid 257:4 maintains that after one removed the insulation, one may return it and cover the pot, even if he initially had the intent to leave it uncovered, provided he did not move the pot from its original place. Other authorities accept the leniency even when one moved the pot.

Tehilah LeDavid, loc. cit., maintains that if one moved the pot, one must fulfill all the requirements necessary to return an article to a range if he desires to return it to its insulation (sec. 253:14), i.e., the pot must be in his hands the entire time, he must have had the intent to return it initially, etc. Shabbos KeHalachah, ch. 11, note 85, however, states that the wording the Alter Rebbe uses in sec. 259:4 does not indicate that it is necessary to fulfill these conditions.

Our translation is based on the gloss of Rav Ovadiah of Bartenura to Keilim 29:2.

See subsection 10.

How much more so is it forbidden to recover the pot or change its insulation.

From sec. 254:4, it appears that this concept applies even if a pot containing food that was not fully cooked is insulated by materials that do not increase its temperature. Since they will add to the pressure on the cover of the pot and prevent the heat of the pot from escaping, this insulation will hasten the cooking process. See also sec. 259:8.

Shabbos 51a.

Shabbos KeHalachah, ch. 11, sec. 29, states that this leniency applies even to solid food. Although some authorities (see Sifsei Kohen, Yoreh Deah 105:8, et al.) maintain that the status of solid food is not downgraded even if it is placed in a k’li sheni (a secondary vessel), that ruling applies only with regard to the prohibitions associated with cooking. The situation at hand, by contrast, is merely a Rabbinic safeguard. Hence, this stringency is not applied.

Similarly, it is permissible on Shabbos to pour hot water, tea, or coffee into a thermos to preserve its heat (Badei HaShulchan 71:36).

When quoting these laws, the Alter Rebbe places the second law in parentheses, implying that this is a matter that he wished to review further. In his Kuntreis Acharon (note 1), the Alter Rebbe notes that the source for these rulings is Magen Avraham 257:14, a decision which is based on the words of Rambam (Hilchos Shabbos 4:5): “Should one transfer hot food or water from the utensil [in which it was cooked] into another utensil, it is permitted to cover the second utensil with a material that does not raise its temperature on Shabbos, like one is permitted to cover cold food. The prohibition against covering [food] on Shabbos applies only to hot food in the vessel in which it was cooked. If it was transferred, it is permitted.”

The Alter Rebbe explains that just as a decree was not instituted against insulating food in a second utensil, so too, a decree was not instituted concerning food that had been in a second utensil and then was returned to the first utensil. Based on this reasoning, the rationale given in the main text – that the food was cooled by the walls of the second utensil – is unnecessary.

However, the Alter Rebbe questions the ruling that even if the food remained in the first utensil, if it cooled to the extent that a hand would not recoil from it, the prohibition against insulating does not apply. The Alter Rebbe notes that the Shulchan Aruch of Rav Yosef Caro (Orach Chayim 253:5) states that it is forbidden to insulate a primary vessel (k’li rishon) that has cooled and place it on a warm pot even though that pot is considered an object that does not increase the temperature (davar she’eino mosif hevel) of the pot placed upon it. Seemingly, this decision runs contrary to the ruling of Rambam cited above.

Nevertheless, the Alter Rebbe raises questions about whether Rav Yosef Caro would indeed rule strictly regarding the instance discussed in the main text, explaining that another reason for the prohibition is that the warm pot conveys warmth (molid chom) to the food placed on it (see the Mahadura Basra to sec. 259, where the Alter Rebbe discusses this issue). Hence, even if the second pot is not considered an object that increases the temperature (davar hamosif hevel) of the pot placed upon it, placing the food on it should be forbidden. Hence, in the instance discussed in the main text, when the cooked food is not placed on an object that conveys warmth, perhaps there is no reason to enforce the stringency of Rav Yosef Caro.

See subsection 5. Here, we are speaking about muchin that are dry.

For this reason, even before the onset of Shabbos, it is forbidden to insulate a pot that is placed on a hot plate or a blech. Moreover, according to the Mahadura Basra to sec. 259, it is forbidden to cover the top of the pot with a blanket even if one leaves the sides of a pot exposed.

In his Kuntreis Acharon (note 2), the Alter Rebbe focuses on two differences in interpretation between his rulings in the main text and those of other halachic authorities:

a) The Alter Rebbe states that the reason for the prohibition against placing a pot insulated in muchin above olive wastes is that the olive wastes “will increase the temperature of the muchin above themand the muchin will increase the temperature of the pot of food that is insulated in them.” Other authorities {Tosafos (Shabbos 48a) and Rabbeinu Asher (Piskei Rosh, Shabbos 4:2), quoted in Beis Yosef, Orach Chayim 257} explain that this prohibition is a safeguard lest one insulate the pot in the olive wastes, having them encompass it entirely.

b) The Alter Rebbe states that the reason for the leniency of allowing one to place an insulated pot in a range from which the coals were removed is that, although the floor of the range is hot, the heat will dissipate since it is not inherently hot and the coals were removed. Tosafos and Rabbeinu Asher, however, offer a different explanation, stating that the reason for the leniency is that, there is no reason to prohibit placing the pot there out of fear that one will insulate a pot in a mixture of ashes and coals since there are no coals there.

The Alter Rebbe elaborates in support of the rationales he stated in the main text, citing other halachic authorities to substantiate his statements. In the course of his explanation, he also discusses the issue of hatmanah bemiksas, partially insulating food. Some – but not all – authorities maintain that when our Sages forbade insulating materials, they also forbade partial insulation. In this Kuntreis Acharon, the Alter Rebbe maintains that even those authorities who forbade partial insulation forbade it only when the insulating material increases the food’s temperature, but not when it merely maintains the food’s temperature. In a note added at a later date, however, the Alter Rebbe writes that Rashba forbids even partial insulation with materials that merely maintain the food’s temperature. In his Mahadura Basra to sec. 259, he states that this stringency should be followed.

The Alter Rebbe also mentions the difference of opinion between halachic authorities when an insulated pot is positioned over, but does not touch, the source of heat.

I.e., although as stated in subsection 5, the waste of sesame seeds is considered a material that increases temperature, it does not increase the temperature sufficiently to cause the clothes to be considered a material that will increase the temperature of the pot. In his Mahadura Basra to sec. 259, the Alter Rebbe restricts the leniency mentioned here, stating that it applies only when a pot of food was placed in another container. This implies that if a pot was insulated in clothes or the like and placed above sesame wastes without a container, it is considered as insulated in a material that increases heat. See Nimukei Shabbos, pp. 176, 571.

Because the coals that heated the range had rested there.

Some (Nimukei Shabbos, p. 178, Kenishta D’Bei Rav, p. 431) infer that the Alter Rebbe’s statements in his Mahadura Basra to sec. 259 lead to greater stringency. Even if the source of the heat of a range or oven was removed (or in contemporary terms, an oven was turned off), it is forbidden to place insulated food inside it.

Even if it does touch the top of the pot.

For the pot is not insulated; there is open space around its walls on all sides.

Uncovered is interpreted not as the pot is open entirely, but that it is not covered with a substance other than its cover.

For otherwise, it would not be possible to insert and remove the pot from the oven.

In his Kuntreis Acharon (note 3), the Alter Rebbe focuses on the statements of Turei Zahav 257:6, that the pot may not touch the walls of the oven at all. The Alter Rebbe rejects that stringency, explaining that, as stated in the main text, hatmanah applies only with regard to materials that can be moved and made to become attached to the walls of the pot and enclose it. Moreover, the Alter Rebbe cites the ruling of Rama (Orach Chayim 253:1), that if a pot is uncovered above, the concept of hatmanah does not apply. Thus even if the pot touches the sides of the oven all around, it is not considered as hatmanah.

In the course of the above dis- cussion, the Alter Rebbe also men- tions – and objects to – two other laws stated by Turei Zahav 258:1:

a) That the concept of hatmanah applies even when the top of a pot is not covered, stating that this contradicts the ruling of Rama stated previously. (It should be noted that in his Mahadura Basra to sec. 259, the Alter Rebbe rules that this applies only to a davar she’eino mosif hevel. If one insulates with a davar hamosif hevel, the concept of hatmanah applies even if the top is not covered.)

b) That an insulated pot or the like placed on a pot that is warm is considered as having been insulated in a davar hamosif hevel. Although the heat of the warm pot will ultimately dissipate, since it is now hot, the food is considered as insulated in a davar hamosif hevel. The Alter Rebbe disputes this contention, citing the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch of Rav Yosef Caro (Orach Chayim 318:6), which state that one may place a pot on a warm pot on Shabbos as long as the top pot will not become so hot that one’s hand will recoil from its touch. These authorities do not consider the placement of one pot on top of a second pot as hatmanah in a davar hamosif hevel.

In his Mahadura Basra to sec. 259, however, it appears that the Alter Rebbe reversed his opinion and ruled that if the heat of the lower pot will increase the temperature of the food insulated above it, the food is considered as if it was insulated in a substance that increases its heat.

This conclusion is also reflected in the summary of the laws of shi’ah and hatmanah that appears after sec. 259.

The term kitniyos is often translated as “legumes,” but it refers to a far more inclusive category of foods. Generally it refers to those types of produce that can be milled into a bread-like flour, and includes, for example, rice, millet, and corn.

Badei HaShulchan 71:10 states that there are certain types of beans that require extensive cooking, to the same degree as meat. Hence, they are governed by the laws applying to meat. See Shabbos KeHalachah, ch. 8, note 79, and other sources that take issue with this leniency.

In that source, it is explained that the reason for leniency when a piece of raw meat is placed in the pot is that, regardless, the food will not be ready for the evening meal, because meat takes a long time to cook. Since the dough and the kitniyos cook rapidly, there are no grounds for leniency.

See sec. 254:1, which states that we are not concerned that the person will remove the seal without realizing that it is Shabbos.

Who permitted leaving food on a range or in an oven (shi’ah) and insulating it (hatmanah).

For he rejects the words of the Sages. The Tzadukim (Sadducees) – and later, the Karaites – rejected the Oral Law and maintained that no hot food could be eaten on Shabbos. See peirush hakatzar of Rav Avraham Ibn Ezra to Shmos 35:3; Responsa Be’er Moshe, Vol. 1:1:2.