Siman 259

It is a known matter that anything which is not fit for a permitted use on Shabbat, or even if it is fit but is not designated for such, is muktzeh and forbidden to be moved. Therefore, if one did not insulate with garments or with pillows and cushions, but rather with soft fibers, such as cotton or soft wool plucked from an animal and the like, and he did not designate them for insulation permanently—for if he designated them, they are indeed fit and designated for insulation and permitted to be moved. However, he did not designate them, but rather only insulated with them one time, and if so, they are not called "designated for such," and they are muktzeh as before, and forbidden to be moved because the insulation is incidental. Therefore, there is one who says that if he insulated twice, it is as if he designated it for insulation, and they are permitted to be moved. (Bach)

And according to the opinion of the Rif and the Rambam in chapter 26, law 12, even if one insulated with shearings of wool that are not so significant—they are forbidden to be moved when he did not designate them for this. And only if he insulated with skins, whether of a householder or of a craftsman—they are permitted to be moved, because he is not fastidious regarding them. But according to the opinion of most of the poskim, wool shearings are also like skins, and if he insulated with them one time—they are permitted to be moved, and so the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch in section 1 ruled without qualification. And these words apply to ordinary shearings that are not set aside for merchandise, but if he placed them in storage for merchandise and is fastidious regarding them—they are forbidden to be moved without designation, or unless he insulated with them two times.

It is a simple matter that those who bury in manure, lime, sand, or straw require designation, for if not so, he would certainly cast them away, as they possess no importance, and automatically they are muktzeh. Therefore, he must designate them for burying, and the designation must be forever. And so too, those who place stones or bricks around the pot—he must designate them for this forever, for as long as he has not designated them, they are not important to him and he casts them away. Therefore, it is forbidden to move them, unless he stores them and designates them for burying. But the stones placed upon a stove are permitted to be moved, for they are designated for use. (Magen Avraham, subsection 7) And among us, regarding the closing of the mouth of the oven, there are those who support the oven cover with wood intended for fuel, and they are forbidden to be moved unless he designated them for this. (ibid.) And the women are not careful in this, due to their lack of knowledge in the laws of muktzeh, and one must warn them about this. And so too, one who plasters the mouth of the oven with worn-out rags—they require designation, and if he did not designate them, they are forbidden to be moved. And when he opens the oven, he should let them fall and not touch them. (See the Bach who wrote that with stones, burying several times does not avail, and it requires further study.)

How should one act when he insulated in a substance that is forbidden to be handled, if a portion of the cover is revealed without the wool or other substance in which he insulated it? He shakes the cover and they fall, meaning that he takes the cover of the pot at the place free of the wool, and the cover has the status of a vessel. And even though the wool is upon the cover, and when he handles the cover he is handling the wool, nevertheless this is handling from the side, since he is not handling them directly, and we hold that handling from the side for the sake of a permitted purpose is permitted in handling, as will be explained in siman 309. And as for that which we do not say that the cover should become a base for the wool, according to the law of a base for a forbidden object: this is only if the cover was an accessory to the wool, but here, on the contrary, the wool serves the pot to heat it, and therefore it is not relevant to say that the cover should be a base for the wool. And if the entire cover is covered by the wool—there is no remedy unless he takes a fork or a knife or another object, and lifts the cover together with the wool. (Magen Avraham subsection 5, and see Turei Zahav subsection 2 who raised a difficulty from the barrel in siman 309, that when he needs its place it is permitted to handle the barrel, and why did they not permit it here, see there. And his words are astonishing, for they only permitted it there when he needs its place, and the Pri Megadim already wondered at him, see there and examine carefully.)

One who insulates in a basket full of wool shearings that are forbidden to be moved, such as those designated for merchandise and he is meticulous regarding them, and he removed the pot—for example, where its top was not covered with shearings—and afterward he wishes to return it into the basket, for returning is permitted in insulation as long as the cavity has not been ruined—it is permitted to return it, for behold, he does not touch the shearings. And if it was ruined, and it is necessary to move them here and there by means of the pot—it is forbidden to return it. And even though moving from the side is permitted as has been written, that is regarding moving in general, but not when he needs to move them much, for then it is like actual moving with his hands. (Tosafot 50b, starting with "Hakol," see there) And nevertheless, we do not forbid its removal to him lest the cavity be ruined, for whichever way you look at it: if it is not ruined—he may return it, and if it is ruined—he may not return it.

And this is regarding something that may not be moved on Shabbat, but if he concealed it in something that may be moved—it is self-evident that there is no concern here regarding its return even if the hole becomes spoiled, for it is permitted to repair it with his actual hands, since he concealed it in something that may be moved, and this is according to the method of Rashi and Tosafot. (Ibid.) However, the Rambam in the Commentary on the Mishnah wrote another reason for the prohibition of returning it when the hole becomes spoiled, that it is not due to the reason of muktzeh, but rather because when the hole becomes spoiled and he returns it by means of repairing the hole—it appears as if he is concealing it for the first time on Shabbat. And if so, there is no distinction between something that may be moved and something that may not be moved, for in both of them it is prohibited. (See the Yerushalmi at the end of the chapter Bameh Tomnin and examine it closely)

If one insulated the pot with a substance that may not be moved on Shabbat, and covered its opening with a substance that may be moved—he uncovers the covering and grasps the pot and removes it, for certainly the top of the pot is also clear of the substance that may not be moved. And likewise the reverse: if he covered the pot with a substance that may not be moved and insulated it with a substance that may be moved—he clears its surroundings and grasps the pot and removes it, for it does not become a base for the covering as has been written, and it is also movement from the side as has been written. And likewise, even if he insulated and covered it with a substance that may not be moved, if a portion of the pot is revealed—he may take it and return it, and if not—he may not take it unless he takes a fork or a knife to lift the covering, as has been written in section 4.

Our ovens, whose openings are closed with a board and sealed with clay—it is permitted to break that seal on Shabbat morning to open the oven, and there is no concern of "breaking a building" in this, for that would only apply if one sealed it for a long period, but here it was only sealed in order to open it in the morning. And one may remove the cooked foods and return to close it if it is possible as before, but usually the clay has already dried, and it is impossible to do as before except by closing the board alone. However, if there are still glowing coals in the oven, and upon opening the oven they flared up by the wind as is their way—it is forbidden for an Israelite to close the opening of the oven, for by closing them the coals will be extinguished, and if they are not extinguished completely—nevertheless their flaming will be diminished, and it is "extinguishing." And one cannot treat this as a "matter that is unintentional," for it will necessarily be so, and it is a "pesik reisha." Therefore, if it is in his power to do it through a non-Jew, to command him to close the opening of the oven—how good, and this is not "commanding a non-Jew is a shevut," for we are not commanding him to extinguish the coals but rather to close the oven, and this happens on its own. And if it is impossible through a non-Jew—he should be careful not to cover the entire opening of the oven, but rather to leave a portion of it open or to place the cover diagonally, for then the bottom side will be open.

And there is one who forbids even opening the oven itself when there are glowing coals there, because through its opening the wind will kindle the coals (Magen Avraham, subsection 11, in the name of Terumat HaDeshen), and this too is a psik reisha. But the custom is not so, for our women open the oven even though there are glowing coals there. And also from the words of our teachers, the authors of the Shulchan Aruch, this is proven, for they wrote in section 7 that if there are glowing coals in it, it is permitted to close it by means of a non-Jew, but not by means of the Israelite. And why did they not also forbid the opening? Rather, it is certain that there is no concern regarding opening. And this is not similar to what was written in siman 277, for there one opens the door of the house and the wind enters from the courtyard; and furthermore, there the primary concern is due to an uncommon wind, and we decree regarding a common wind on account of an uncommon wind (Taz ibid., subsection 4). But when opening the oven into the house and not into the courtyard, there is neither a concern of kindling nor a concern of extinguishing. And even though we see that some time after the opening of the oven the glowing coals will appear, whereas previously they were as if covered—nevertheless, at the time of the action he does nothing, and even afterwards this is not complete kindling, and it is merely a grama, and we say explicitly in Shabbat (120b) that grama is permitted; see there. (And regarding what the Magen Avraham wrote of this law from Terumat HaDeshen, I am astonished, for there in siman 59 he does not deal at all with opening the mouth of the oven but rather with opening the window opposite the candle; see there. And it appears that the intention of the Magen Avraham is that he holds that opening the oven is similar to opening the door, but this is not a comparison; and delve into this.)

I have further seen one who wrote that some forbid closing the oven with glowing coals due to a concern of kindling, for the wind exits through a small hole, and it is similar to a bellows and kindles the oven more than if it were entirely open (ibid.). According to this, when they close the oven, they must leave a large opening. But in truth, these are puzzling words, and many disagree regarding this, and the prohibition in closing is due to the reason of extinguishing and not due to the reason of kindling (Terumat HaDeshen and Responsa of the Rema and Eliyah Rabbah, subsection 12). And it is simple that when the fire is burning within it—that it is forbidden to close it entirely, for it will certainly be extinguished. However, by leaving an open space—it is permitted, and certainly one needs an open space of some duration, for if not so, it is nothing.

However, regarding that which has been explained, that there is no prohibition of tearing down in the tearing down of an oven, our teacher, the Rema, wrote that there are those who are stringent not to tear down the sealing of an oven plastered with clay by means of an Israelite, if it is possible to do so by means of a non-Jew. And likewise, if it is possible to do so by means of a minor Israelite—an adult Israelite should not do it, and if it is not possible—an adult should do it by means of a slight change, and thus is the custom. Thus far his words. But among us, the custom is not so, and likewise one of the great authorities wrote (Eliyah Rabbah, subsection 15) that Maharash, the teacher of the Maharil, permitted doing so ab initio.

He further wrote: "That which it is permitted to return and seal the oven—this is during the day, for all the pots are already fully cooked. But at night, close to its hatmanah, where there is doubt that perhaps the pots are not yet fully cooked—it is forbidden to seal the oven, for he causes cooking as is written in siman 257, and it is forbidden even by means of a non-Jew, as is written above at the end of siman 253." Thus far his words. Therefore, one must be very careful in this, unless it is known that the cooked foods are already finished, for then it may be permitted by means of a non-Jew. But otherwise, if they did so by means of an Israelite—the cooked food is forbidden even post facto, until the conclusion of Shabbat for the time it takes to be prepared. However, if it was done by means of a non-Jew, although they committed a transgression—nevertheless, the cooked food may be permitted post facto, since even without this it would have cooked. (Magen Avraham, subsection 12)

There is reason to doubt that if there is a necessity to open the oven for a sick person where there is danger, and it is permitted by an Israelite, or where there is no danger and it was opened by a non-Jew, if it is permitted to command a non-Jew afterward to close it, like those matters where they permitted the end because of the beginning (Beitzah 11b), or if they did not permit it. It appears that it is permitted by a non-Jew. Furthermore, since if they do not close the oven he will have nothing to eat on Shabbat morning—one should permit amirah l'akum in such cases. It is much better than what our teacher, the Rema, permitted below in siman 276, to command to light the candle for the sake of the Shabbat meal, see there; for here he was forced to open it for the sick person, whereas there, he could have prepared while it was still day. Therefore, it should be permitted by a non-Jew.

In their times, there were those who would perform hatmanah with stones, meaning they made the stones like a building, by placing stones around the pot one on top of the other. Therefore, on a Yom Tov that falls on the eve of Shabbat, some forbid performing hatmanah with stones, on the grounds that it appears like building on Yom Tov. And some permit it, as it does not appear like building, and for the sake of the honor of Shabbat they did not decree. Therefore, when it is possible to perform hatmanah in another manner, one should not perform hatmanah with stones (Magen Avraham, subsection 10), and nowadays we do not know of this hatmanah at all.

And behold, after all the laws of shehiyah and hatmanah have been explained, and it has already been explained that our ovens do not possess the law of hatmanah at all, and are only called shehiyah, and also their law is like a kirah and not like the oven of the time of the Gemara. And if they plastered the oven with clay—it is permitted according to all opinions; however, if they did not plaster—it depends on the opinions we explained in siman 253, section 27. But if they placed ash upon the coals and raked the coals to one side of the oven—it is also permitted according to all opinions. And we hold the position of Rashi and Tosafot, that shehiyah is permitted on a kirah that is not raked or covered with ash, provided the cooked food reached the state of ma'achal ben derusai by nightfall. And on top of the oven and in front of the oven, which they call yamka or kaminak, and likewise in the kachlach—this is considered samichah and is permitted, as I wrote there. Only one must be careful among us not to open the oven in the evening as long as the cooked foods for tomorrow have not been fully cooked, and this is a Torah prohibition if they subsequently seal the oven. And they should also be careful not to wrap on Shabbat any pot, or the leiyakes from which they drink hot water and also the tzanikes, with anything, for this is hatmanah. And each person must supervise the members of his household so that they do not do so, and also one must warn them not to support the board that seals the oven with pieces of wood or stones, unless he designated them for this purpose permanently. And because this matter is very common, and the women do not know of this prohibition, therefore it is necessary to warn them, as I wrote in section 3.