Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Shiurim by Rabbi Meir Finkelstein in KBY.
Enjoyed? Your feedback means a lot to us. Click here to email us: https://tinyurl.com/thanksEN
In גמרא Gemara in ביצה דף ל\"ד עמוד א' Beitzah Daf Lamed-Daled Amud Aleph, I'll read to you the גמרא Gemara and then we'll see the גמרא שבת Gemara Shabbat. So גמרא ביצה Gemara Beitzah and גמרא שבת Gemara Shabbat. גמרא Gemara in ביצה דף ל\"ד עמוד א' Beitzah Daf Lamed-Daled Amud Aleph says as follows: תניא Tanya, אחד מביא את האור echad meivi et ha'ur, again אור ur with an 'u' is fire, ואחד מביא את העצים ve'echad meivi et ha'etzim, ואחד שופת את הקדירה ve'echad souphet et hakedeyra, ואחד מביא את המים ve'echad meivi et hamayim, ואחד נותן בתוכה תבלין ve'echad noten betochah tavlin, ואחד מגיס ve'echad megis, כולן חייבין kulan chayavin. So you see here if anyone, anyone who does a step in the בישול bishul process is חייב chayav for בישול bishul and one of the steps is מגיס megis. מגיס Megis means to stir. So if somebody stirs the pot, he's חייב chayav for בישול bishul. That's the גמרא מסכת ביצה Gemara Masechet Beitzah. There is as well a גמרא מסכת שבת Gemara Masechet Shabbat, that's why I asked you to bring a שבת Shabbat. If you have it in front of you, you can open it up. גמרא Gemara on דף י\"ח עמוד ב' Daf Yud-Chet Amud Bet and this takes us kind of full circle. We started the לימוד limud the first week in אלול Elul on י\"ח עמוד ב' Yud-Chet Amud Bet if you remember because that's about שהייה shehiyah. So we're really, we're going back to the שקלא וטריא shakla vetarya about שהייה shehiyah right now where the גמרא Gemara says, if you remember what is שהייה shehiyah, it's been forever. So what is שהייה shehiyah, right? You're not allowed to leave food on the fire from before שבת Shabbat into שבת Shabbat because of a גזירה שמא יחתה בגחלים gzeyrah shema yehateh begachalim, you might come to stoke the coals. So the גמרא Gemara says in that context here on שבת י\"ח עמוד ב' Shabbat Yud-Chet Amud Bet, the גמרא Gemara is, if you see the ג' gimel of the עין משפט Ein Mishpat, so it's one line right below that: צמר ליורה לצבוע tzemer leyoreh litzbor. Let's say you have wool in a pot, wool that's dyeing in a pot. They would put the wool into hot water to dye it, so it's dyeing, D-Y-E, right? So if it's dyeing in the pot, so you should be גוזר gozer that you might stoke the coals. So אמר שמואל ביורה עקורה amar Shmuel beyoreh akurah. שמואל Shmuel says no, we're talking about a pot that is off the fire, so there's no concern of stoking the coals. Now the גמרא Gemara says: ונחוש שמא מגיס בה venichosh shema megis bah. Why don't we have a concern you might stir the pot? Answers the גמרא Gemara: no, בעקורה וטוכה ba'akurah vetuchah. It's not only off the fire, it's also covered over in plaster, if you remember the term טוח בטיט tuch betit that was this גמרא Gemara. Fine. But what's, I think when we read this גמרא Gemara at the time, when we learned שהייה shehiyah and טוח בטיט tuch betit, we said, ah, מגיס megis we'll get to one day, but we're focusing on the answer now. So that day is here. So now we're focusing on the first line, not the second line: ונחוש שמא מגיס בה venichosh shema megis bah. The גמרא Gemara says there's a concern that you might do הגסה hagasa. What's that concern? So רש\"י Rashi says, מגיס מהפך בה megis mehappech bah, means you stir it, ובמבושל הוי בישול uvmevushal havei bishul. Now, this רש\"י Rashi is difficult to translate and we will hopefully come back to it in the המשך hemshech of the שיעור shi'ur, not right now but after we develop a few more things, we'll come back and try to piece together these three words. What does it mean ובמבושל הוי בישול uvmevushal havei bishul? Just say הוי בישול havei bishul. What's ובמבושל הוי בישול uvmevushal havei bishul? One thing that's clear is רש\"י Rashi says there's an איסור בישול issur bishul going on. That I think we could deduce enough even though that might become unclear later, but the פשטות pashtus right now is רש\"י Rashi seems to clearly be talking about an איסור בישול issur bishul. Why does he say ובמבושל הוי בישול uvmevushal havei bishul? Okay, we'll hopefully come back to that in a little bit. תוספות Tosafot in דיבור המתחיל דילמא dibbur hamatchel dilma over here says no, the איסור issur is צובע tzove'ah. If you stir the pot, so the concern is that, you know, you're going to be deepening the dye of the wool. So you're stirring it in the dye, so then you're deepening the dye. The איסור issur here is צובע tzove'ah, it has nothing to do with בישול bishul. The רמב\"ם Rambam in הלכות שבת פרק ג' הלכה י\"א Hilchot Shabbat Perek Gimel Halacha Yud-Aleph writes as follows, this is a quote from the רמב\"ם Rambam: אסור להכניס מגרפה לקדירה בשבת assur lehachnis magreyfah likdeyra beShabbat, you're not allowed to put a מגרפה magreyfah, let's call it a ladle, into a pot on a שבת Shabbat, והיא על האש vehi al ha'esh, and the pot is on the fire, להוציא ממנה בשבת lehotzi mimena beShabbat, to take food out of the pot on שבת Shabbat, מפני שמגיס בה mipnei shemegis bah, because when you put in the ladle and you take out food, you're going to inevitably stir the pot. And why is that a problem? וזה מצרכי הבישול הוא vezeh mitzarchei habishul hu. Stirring the pot is מצרכי הבישול mitzarchei habishul, it is of the needs of בישול bishul, ונמצא כמבשל בשבת venimtza kimevushal beShabbat, and it turns out it is like cooking on שבת Shabbat. So this is an interesting רמב\"ם Rambam. The רמב\"ם Rambam here is clearly talking about an איסור בישול issur bishul as well when you do הגסה hagasa, there's a concern of בישול bishul, but the רמב\"ם Rambam says two interesting things. Number one he says it's מצרכי הבישול mitzarchei habishul, he didn't call it בישול bishul, he said it is of the needs of בישול bishul. Why not just call it בישול bishul? And the רמב\"ם Rambam also says it's כמבשל בשבת kimevushal beShabbat, it's like בישול bishul. So what does it mean, is it בישול bishul or is it not בישול bishul? So הרב וידרבלנק Rabbi Wiederblank suggested that this רמב\"ם Rambam needs to be explained based on another רמב\"ם Rambam. There's a רמב\"ם Rambam in הלכות שבת פרק ט' הלכה י\"א Hilchot Shabbat Perek Tet Halacha Yud-Aleph. הרב וידרבלנק Rabbi Wiederblank quoted this פשט pshat from the חזון איש Chazon Ish. I didn't find it in the חזון איש Chazon Ish, I'm sure it's there, I just haven't succeeded in finding it yet, but whether it's the חזון איש Chazon Ish or it's הרב וידרבלנק Rabbi Wiederblank, it's a good פשט pshat. So he based on the רמב\"ם Rambam in פרק ט' הלכה י\"א Perek Tet Halacha Yud-Aleph that the רמב\"ם Rambam says: המכבס בגדים hamechabbes begadim, if somebody launders clothing on שבת Shabbat, הרי הוא harei hu If somebody does סחיטה schita, you squeeze the garment עד שיצא המים שבו ad sheyotzi hamayim shebo until you take the water out of the garment, הרי זה מכבס harey ze mechabes, that's also מכבס mechabes, וחייב v'chayav, and you're חייב chayav. Why? שהסחיטה מצורכי כיבוס היא shehaschita mitzorchei kibbus hee כמו שההגסה מצורכי הבישול kemo shehahagasa mitzorchei habishul. רמב\"ם Rambam writes that סחיטה schita is to כיבוס kibbus what הגסה hagasa is to בישול bishul. סחיטה Schita is of the needs of laundering, like הגסה hagasa is of the needs of cooking. So what does that mean? So you see something very interesting here. What is סחיטה schita in the laundering process? סחיטה Schita is not laundering, right? The clothing's clean already; you just want to squeeze out the water. סחיטה Schita is a step in the laundering process. You can't launder without doing סחיטה schita, because otherwise your clothing will be soaked, right? So you you do the laundry, and then a step in the laundering process is to do סחיטה schita at the end. It's not the act of laundering, but it's step in the it's a step in the larger laundering process. The similarly, perhaps that's what the רמב\"ם Rambam means when he talks about הגסה hagasa. When you stir the pot, you're not cooking. Food's cooked already. Stirring though is a step in the cooking process. You cook food and then you stir the pot to distribute the flavor, to loosen it up, to stop it from clumping, whatever it is. So, so הגסה hagasa is not cooking. It's a very fascinating thing the רמב\"ם Rambam is saying. Part of מלאכת בישול melachas bishul could be not just technical cooking but whatever the cooking process entails. So just like the laundering process entails סחיטה schita at the end, so that's כיבוס kibbus, the cooking process entails הגסה hagasa at the end, so that is בישול bishul. Fine. So that's again three שיטות shittos in הגסה hagasa. רש\"י Rashi says it's בישול bishul, תוספות Tosafos says it's צובע tzovea, the רמב\"ם Rambam says it's מצורכי הבישול mitzorchei habishul which is included under under the rubric of the איסור בישול issur bishul. Is that a question, a פשט pshat in the גמרא Gemara? What do you mean? בביצה beBeitzah? That הגסה hagasa is a step in the process? Well, the גמרא Gemara in ביצה Beitzah lists a lot of things, somebody brings the firewood and somebody who puts the food in the pot, so presumably that's בישול bishul. The פשט pshat in the גמרא Gemara would be they're all חייב chayav for doing בישול bishul. You can't have בישול bishul without any of those steps, so those are they're all doing בישול bishul together presumably. But but but that's how the רמב\"ם Rambam would read it, but without the רמב\"ם Rambam you didn't have to read it that way; you could say no, just like who just like whoever lights the fire violated בישול bishul, so whoever stirs violates בישול bishul. The רשב\"א Rashba on דף יח עמוד ב Daf Yud Ches Amud Beis דיבור המתחיל dibbur hamaschil ואקשי v'Akshi is bothered by a question, and this is where הגסה hagasa becomes very very למעשה l'maaseh. The רשב\"א Rashba is bothered by a question. If הגסה hagasa is אסור assur, how do you ever take food out of a pot on שבת Shabbos? Because if you if you stick the ladle in the pot, like the רמב\"ם Rambam said, inevitably you stir the contents of the pot when you put the ladle in. So the רשב\"א Rashba says: how do you ever take food out of a pot on שבת Shabbos? So the רשב\"א Rashba answers two answers. Answer number one is only the when we say הגסה hagasa is אסור assur, only only the first stir is אסור assur, but הגסה hagasa after that is מותר mutar. How do you explain that? Right, if הגסה hagasa is about stirring the contents of the pot and doing בישול bishul by stirring everything together, so why would that make sense? I don't know, maybe the answer is you have to explain like the רמב\"ם Rambam that it's not really בישול bishul, it's מצורכי הבישול mitzorchei habishul. So only the first step, the first הגסה hagasa, the first stir up, the first stir, that's the completion of the בישול bishul process. After that, there's no more בישול bishul. I don't know, maybe that's a potential פשט pshat in the רשב\"א Rashba. The second פשט pshat in the רשב\"א Rashba is the רשב\"א Rashba says that it's אין הכי נמי ein hachi nami, it's אסור assur to put a ladle in a pot and take out the contents if the food is not cooked כמאכל בן דרוסאי k'maachal ben drusai. But if the food is already cooked כמאכל בן דרוסאי k'maachal ben drusai, so then there's no longer an איסור issur of בישול bishul, and then it's מותר mutar. Now the רשב\"א Rashba here in this presentation makes two assumptions. Assumption number one is that ladling out of a pot is the equivalent of הגסה hagasa. That is something you find in many ראשונים Rishonim. The ר\"ן Ran on דף ו עמוד ב Daf Vav Amud Beis בדפי הרי\"ף b'dapei haRif דיבור המתחיל dibbur hamaschil ודילמא מגיס v'dilma megis. The רא\"ש Rosh in פרק א סימן לד Perek Aleph Siman Lamed Daled assume the same way that what we call הוצאה בכף hotzaa b'chaf ladling out would have the same status as as מגיס megis. The second assumption that the רשב\"א Rashba makes over here and the ר\"ן Ran says it as well is that once it's כמאכל בן דרוסאי k'maachal ben drusai it's מותר mutar because once something is כמאכל בן דרוסאי k'maachal ben drusai there's no longer a problem, there's no longer an איסור issur of בישול bishul. We learned many moons ago that this is a מחלוקת ראשונים machlokes Rishonim. Granted that's the שיטה shitta of the רשב\"א Rashba, but we saw that תוספות Tosafos and the רמב\"ם Rambam disagree. תוספות Tosafos and the רמב\"ם Rambam hold that there's בישול bishul until it's מבושל כל צורכו mevushal kol tzorcho and we פסקן pasken הלכה למעשה halacha l'maaseh like the רמב\"ם Rambam and תוספות Tosafos. So the ביאור הלכה Biur Halacha says in a pinch בדיעבד b'dieved to be you could be סומך somech on the other שיטה shitta if it was already done, but certainly לכתחילה l'chatchila we we פסקן pasken fundamentally like תוספות Tosafos and the and the רמב\"ם Rambam. So what this would mean for us is just carrying over the רשב״א Rashba's principle in a way we would פוסקן pasken. We wouldn't say if it's מאכל בן דרוסאי maachal ben drosai you could ladle it out. We would say if it's מבושל כל צרכו mevushal kol tzarko you could ladle it out. If הגסה hagasah is בישול bishul so once something's fully cooked you can't have בישול bishul anymore. זהו zehu. So if it's if it's fully cooked, so then you can ladle it out for now. That's what the analysis up until now would would yield. Fine. What is the רמב״ם Rambam's שיטה shittah about הוצאה בכף hotza'ah b'kaf? What's the רמב״ם Rambam's שיטה shittah about ladling out of a pot? So the רמב״ם Rambam going back to that רמב״ם Rambam that we quoted a minute ago in פרק ג הלכה יא perek gimmel halacha yud aleph, the רמב״ם Rambam's לשון lashon if you remember we said was אסור להכניס מגריפה assur l'hachnis magrefa. The way the רמב״ם Rambam presented the whole איסור issur of הגסה hagasah was you're not allowed to ladle out of a pot. So according to the רמב״ם Rambam ladling out clearly is אסור assur. However comes along the מגיד משנה Maggid Mishneh and says it's only אסור מדרבנן assur m'derabbanan. The רמב״ם Rambam says the מגיד משנה Maggid Mishneh says that the רמב״ם Rambam's שיטה shittah is that wherever הגסה hagasah is דאורייתא d'oraisa so then הוצאה בכף hotza'ah b'kaf is מדרבנן m'derabbanan and wherever הגסה hagasah is מדרבנן m'derabbanan הוצאה בכף hotza'ah b'kaf is מותר mutar. What does that mean practically? So the way the מגיד משנה Maggid Mishneh says it is that if you have something that is not fully cooked it's not מבושל כל צרכו mevushal kol tzarko so you have an איסור issur of הגסה hagasah דאורייתא d'oraisa so then הוצאה בכף hotza'ah b'kaf is אסור מדרבנן assur m'derabbanan. However if it's already fully cooked the מגיד משנה Maggid Mishneh says there will still be an איסור הגסה מדרבנן issur hagasah m'derabbanan on that. That's important to keep in mind we'll have to come back to that this is the first time we're seeing that something fully cooked can have an איסור הגסה issur hagasah. The מגיד משנה Maggid Mishneh says there can be an איסור issur of הגסה hagasah on something that's fully cooked מדרבנן m'derabbanan. So but there when it's fully cooked הוצאה בכף hotza'ah b'kaf will be מותר mutar because you always go one level down for הוצאה בכף hotza'ah b'kaf. Fine. One important הערה ha'arah in the רמב״ם Rambam is that the רמב״ם Rambam only says there's an איסור issur of הגסה hagasah when the pot is on the fire. If you remember the לשון lashon of the רמב״ם Rambam I'll quote it to you again the רמב״ם Rambam in ג יא gimmel yud aleph אסור להכניס מגריפה לקדירה בשבת והיא על האש assur l'hachnis magrefa l'kedeira b'shabbos v'hi al ha'esh. So the לחם משנה Lechem Mishneh asks on the רמב״ם Rambam why is it only אסור assur if it's on the fire? Any כלי ראשון kli rishon cooks even if the כלי ראשון kli rishon is no longer on the fire. So even if you took it off the fire but it's still hot why shouldn't there be a בישול bishul problem of הגסה hagasah? So what might the answer to this רמב״ם Rambam be? Does anybody remember when we discussed שיטת הרמב״ם shittas haRambam about בישול bishul in a כלי ראשון kli rishon? We learned that there was an אגלי טל Eglei Tal and an ערוך השולחן Aruch HaShulchan that had this מחודש שיטה mechudash shittah in the רמב״ם Rambam that the רמב״ם Rambam holds even a כלי ראשון kli rishon is only מבשל m'vashel when it's on the fire. So maybe that's לשיטתו l'shittaso. The רמב״ם Rambam holds that not it's not true that any כלי ראשון kli rishon is מבשל m'vashel only a כלי ראשון kli rishon on the fire could be מבשל m'vashel. But we said that was a big דוחק dochek. I think we had a שביתת השבת Shevisas HaShabbos and we had we had קשיות kashyas from קלי הבישול kallei habishul and different we we had קלי הבישול kallei habishul was our big קשיא kashya on the רמב״ם Rambam. And and we didn't like that פשט pshat. We we like the פשט pshat that the רמב״ם Rambam thinks that a כלי ראשון kli rishon is always מבשל דאורייתא m'vashel d'oraisa. So what then why then would the רמב״ם Rambam say it's only an איסור הגסה issur hagasah when it's on the fire? So the answer is that it's a little bit of a mystery. Rabbi Wiederblank suggested two answers. One answer was that in the לשונות leshonos of the ראשונים rishonim when they present הגסה hagasah as בישול bishul so in the רשב״א Rashba for example you find that he doesn't just call it בישול bishul. He says הגסה hagasah is מקרב בישולא mekarev bishula. So it's unclear what that means like is it בישול bishul or is it not? It's something like bringing closer to בישול bishul. So maybe whatever that is can only happen if you're bringing it closer to the fire and so you need to be on the fire. Maybe but it's hard you'd have to put a סברא sevara to that not sure. The second way to explain this could be the רמב״ם לשיטתו Rambam l'shittaso right the רמב״ם Rambam said מצרכי הבישול m'tzorchei habishul. הגסה Hagasah is not בישול ממש bishul mamesh it's a step in the בישול bishul process. It's when you finish בישול bishul so the normal thing to do is give a stir at the end. So maybe that is when it's on the fire. Like the normal process the food's on the fire it's cooking you give a stir at the end but once you take it off the fire גמרנו gamarnu the בישול bishul process. So maybe that's the way to explain the רמב״ם Rambam but to be honest it still needs work. This is it's a little bit mysterious but that's you know those are two two openings to to explaining this רמב״ם Rambam. The ראב״ד Ravid on the רמב״ם Rambam there in ג יא gimmel yud aleph holds that הוצאה בכף hotza'ah b'kaf is מותר לגמרי mutar legamri. Says ladling out is is מותר mutar. One more קשיא kashya on the רמב״ם Rambam and then and then yeah one more קשיא kashya on the רמב״ם Rambam so and then after this I'll pause for questions. We will after this we'll sum up what we're up where we're up to we will recap and then I'll pause for questions. The the one קשיא kashya on the רמב״ם Rambam is that how do you understand the way the מגיד משנה Maggid Mishneh was explaining the רמב״ם Rambam that הוצאה hotza'ah when הגסה hagasah is דאורייתא d'oraisa הוצאה בכף hotza'ah b'kaf is מדרבנן m'derabbanan? If הוצאה בכף hotza'ah b'kaf is just הגסה hagasah meaning you're not allowed to ladle out because you're going to stir so so you're stirring. So stirring is דאורייתא d'oraisa הוצאה בכף hotza'ah b'kaf should be דאורייתא d'oraisa. If if you're not stirring it should be מותר mutar. Like what's the what's the מדרבנן m'derabbanan here that that makes it on a lower level than הגסה hagasah? So how do you explain this? It's not clear. It's not clear what the answer is. Rabbi Weiderblank had an interesting suggestion. Rabbi Weiderblank suggested that the reason I'm hesitating is because the ראיות raiyas here are not so 100% clear to me, but I'll tell you the suggestion. Rabbi Weiderblank suggested that הוצאה בכף hotsaa bechaf is not אסור assur because you're going to do הגסה hagasa. If you do הגסה hagasa, that's הגסה hagasa. הוצאה בכף hotsaa bechaf is an independent איסור issur. You're not allowed to ladle out. So maybe let's spell this out with a נפקא מינה nafka mina. What would be the הלכה halacha in the following case? Let's say there is let's say you have your טשאלנט cholent pot, let's say you have the crockpot and there's a potato sitting on the top. Are you allowed to take a spoon and ladle out just that potato? You're not stirring anything, right? So why is this question a good way of illustrating the point? If הוצאה בכף hotsaa bechaf is אסור assur because you're doing הגסה hagasa, that should be מותר mutter. If הוצאה בכף hotsaa bechaf is an independent איסור issur, that should be אסור assur. So Rabbi Weiderblank thought that would be אסור assur and he thought that that would be the explanation of this מגיד משנה magid mishneh. הוצאה בכף hotsaa bechaf is an independent גזירה gezeira. It's not because you're doing הגסה hagasa; it might be because you're in come to do הגסה hagasa, that might be the impetus, but it's not that only when you're actively doing הגסה hagasa הוצאה בכף hotsaa bechaf is אסור assur. No, הוצאה בכף hotsaa bechaf is an independent איסור issur, and that's what the מגיד משנה magid mishneh means when he says it's דרבנן derabonan. It's an interesting suggestion. Rabbi Weiderblank thought though you'd be allowed to take it out with a fork because the גזירה gezeira דרבנן derabonan was only הוצאה בכף hotsaa bechaf. It's only they only גזר gozer on a spoon. Never find that חז\"ל Chazal גזר gozer on a fork. What the reason to לחלק hachalik is simple: you use a spoon to stir, you don't use a fork to stir. So if you ever have such a scenario you want to take a potato off the top of the pot, use a fork, not a spoon. I saw in the שמירת שבת כהלכתה Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchasa, this is in פרק א' perek alef footnote מ\"ב mem-beis in the old שמירת שבת כהלכתה Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchasa. It's complicated when you use שמירת שבת כהלכתה Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchasa because there's the old edition, the new edition, I think there's actually three editions. And whenever you use any ספר sefer that quotes the שמירת שבת כהלכתה Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchasa, you have to know what year the ספר sefer was printed because which שמירת שבת כהלכתה Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchasa they're referring to. I just yesterday was learning a סוגיא sugya that quoted something from שמירת שבת כהלכתה Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchasa, quoted a מראה מקום mareh makom. I opened it up, obviously it wasn't there because he was quoting the old שמירת שבת Shemiras Shabbos, I was using the new שמירת שבת Shemiras Shabbos. So it's usually like you know like 40 footnotes later because he added things in the newer editions. It's still there, it's the same kind of thing, you just have to find it in a different place. So this is in the old edition. I don't remember, I was probably using the old edition because I probably learned this when I was in my parents' house in Teaneck and my father owns the old one. I probably used his שמירת שבת כהלכתה Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchasa, probably didn't have mine with me because it was probably in ישיבה yeshiva. That's how I would guess that's how like why I have it in my notes as the old one. But anyways if you want to track down the מראה מקום mareh makom, so just know פרק א' perek alef footnote מ\"ב mem-beis in the old one and then from there you can figure out where it correlates in the new one. So he raises the following question: are you allowed to pour contents out of a pot? Right? If if הגסה hagasa is אסור assur because you're stirring the contents and and and הוצאה בכף hotsaa bechaf is אסור assur because when you stick in the spoon, so Rabbi Weiderblank thought in the מגיד משנה magid mishneh it's אסור assur as a גזירה בפני עצמו gezeira bifnei atzmo, but it's certainly אסור assur if you're going to stir. So when you pour things out, it also gets all stirred together, so are you allowed to pour out of a pot? So the שמירת שבת Shemiras Shabbos writes you can only pour slowly. You can't pour out fast. If you pour something, it's like you dump the contents out, everything gets all mixed together. But if you pour very slowly, so then it just pours in a stream that doesn't get all mixed together, so then you don't have a הגסה hagasa problem. Fine. So למעשה lemaisa, meaning how do you ever get food out of a pot on שבת Shabbos? Meaning you have your כלי ראשון kli rishon. You can't ladle out of it. So but and you can't pour, you can't dump the contents out like the שמירת שבת Shemiras Shabbos says, so you have to just pour slowly. You pour it into slowly into a second pot and then you can ladle out of that second pot. Fine. So let's recap where we're up to and then we'll get into some even even more למעשה lemaisa discussions. So what have we said so far? We said there's an איסור issur of הגסה hagasa. גמרא ביצה Gemara Beitzah, גמרא שבת Gemara Shabbos, three שיטות shitos of ראשונים rishonim: רש\"י Rashi, תוספות Tosafos, the רמב\"ם Rambam, בישול טביא bishul toveia or כבישול k'bishul. Fine. We explained the רמב\"ם Rambam כבישול k'bishul based on סחיטה sechita. Fine. Then we discussed we saw the שיטת הרשב\"א shitas HaRashba that once it's מאכל בן דרוסאי maachal ben drusai it's good, that's לשיטתו l'shitaso, for us it means מבושל כל צרכו mevuushal kol tsorko. What about הוצאה בכף hotsaa bechaf? So we said... The רשב״א Rashba says it's אסור assur. We saw that the רמב״ם Rambam says it's אסור assur, but we saw the רשב״א Rashba says it's מותר mutar if it's מבושל כל צרכו meivushal kol tzarko. We saw that the, meaning for him, מאכל בן דרוסאי maachal ben drosai, for us what would be מבושל כל צרכו meivushal kol tzarko. We saw that the רמב״ם Rambam thinks that it's אסור assur even if it's מבושל כל צרכו meivushal kol tzarko, at least according to the מגיד משנה Maggid Mishneh, but only if it's on the fire. Not if it's off the fire according to the רמב״ם Rambam. And then we explained why הוצאה בכף hotza'ah bakaf would only be דרבנן d'rabbanan if הגסה hagasa is דאורייתא d'oraisa. We gave two סברות svaras for the רמב״ם Rambam and we tried to explain why הוצאה בכף hotza'ah bakaf would be דרבנן d'rabbanan because it's an independent איסור issur, even when you're not doing הגסה hagasa, like taking the potato off the top of the cholent pot. And then we saw שמירת שבת כהלכתה Shemiras Shabbos Kehilchasa's discussion about שפיכה shepicha, about pouring out faster, slow. Fine. But where we hold right now, so is again very, very important to take stock because things are about to get interesting. Right, where we hold right now is הגסה hagasa is always אסור assur, certainly if it's not fully cooked. If it's fully cooked, we haven't seen anyone discuss it yet. הוצאה בכף hotza'ah bakaf, so we've seen that if you go with the רשב״א Rashba's camp, it's אסור assur only if it's not fully cooked. Again, what he says מאכל בן דרוסאי maachal ben drosai, but carrying over for us, that means fully cooked. For the רמב״ם Rambam, it's אסור assur even if it's fully cooked, but only if it's on the fire. We have not seen anyone who says that if the food is off the fire and fully cooked, הוצאה בכף hotza'ah bakaf is אסור assur. We have not yet seen such a שיטה shita. Fine. Yeah, go ahead. How does everyone understand how you can say it's an independent איסור issur, like do we need some source? Yeah, it would probably mean it's a גזירה gezeira, like חז״ל Chazal were גוזר gozer because if we allow you to ladle out the potato on top of the pot, you might come to ladle contents deeper into the pot and that would be stirring, that would be a problem. That would be a דרבנן d'rabbanan. It could be תולדה tolda, it's a תולדה tolda of בישול bishul, the דאורייתא d'oraisa is דרבנן d'rabbanan of דרבנן d'rabbanan. תולדה tolda is דאורייתא d'oraisa. תולדה tolda is דאורייתא d'oraisa. I wasn't told בישול bishul, בישול bishul is דאורייתא d'oraisa. דרבנן d'rabbanan is דרבנן d'rabbanan. Any other questions before we move on? Okay. So what's the story with הגסה hagasa on something that is already fully cooked? Is there such an איסור issur? Can you have הגסה hagasa on something that's already fully cooked? So if הגסה hagasa is about בישול bishul, presumably it's not שייך shayach if it's fully cooked, right? You can't cook something that's already cooked, אין בישול אחר בישול ein bishul achar bishul. רש״י Rashi, however, let's go back to that רש״י Rashi that we started with that we said was a very, very hard רש״י Rashi to read. רש״י Rashi said about הגסה hagasa, he said מהפך בה mehapach bah ובמבושל הוי בישול uvemivushal havei bishul. What do those words mean, ובמבושל הוי בישול uvemivushal havei bishul? So if you just take the words at face value, ובמבושל uvemivushal, something that is already cooked, הוי בישול havei bishul, it's בישול bishul. Sounds like רש״י Rashi's saying even if it's already cooked, you can have הגסה hagasa. Okay, but why would רש״י Rashi say that? That's not relevant presumably to the שקלא וטריא shakla v'tarya about צמר ליורה tzemmer l'yora, so it would be a funny line for רש״י Rashi to just throw in. So there are a number of approaches to this רש״י Rashi. The מהרש״ל Maharshal actually changes the גרסה girsa in רש״י Rashi and says רש״י Rashi should be read as saying וכמבושל הוי בישול u'kemevushal havei bishul. And what רש״י Rashi is saying really is that this איסור issur is צובע tzoveya like תוספות Tosfos and not בישול bishul. And he's saying וכמבושל הוי בישול u'kemevushal havei bishul, just like... still hard to translate מבושל הוי בישול mevushal havei bishul, not sure how to translate that. Here it's צובע tzoveya. That's the מהרש״ל Maharshal's read, but again, still difficult to put together. The ב״ח Bach says you should read רש״י Rashi as saying ומבשל הוי בישול u'mivvashel havei bishul. And that read actually makes a lot of sense. Meaning רש״י Rashi would be saying this is צובע tzoveya because here we're talking about a צובע tzoveya case, ומבשל u'mivvashel, in a corollary case if you would be talking about בישול bishul, oh, then it would be בישול bishul. Meaning there's a time that הגסה hagasa will be צובע tzoveya when you're talking about dying wool, and there's a time that הגסה hagasa will be בישול bishul if you're talking about food. So that actually is a nice read in רש״י Rashi if you take out the middle ו vav from the word ובמבושל uvemivvushal, ומבשל הוי בישול u'mivvashel havei bishul. That's what the ב״ח Bach wants to read in רש״י Rashi. The מהרש״א Maharsha says however it's clear in the רא״ש Rosh that רש״י Rashi thinks the איסור issur of הגסה hagasa is בישול bishul and not צובע tzoveya. But it's not clear how to read רש״י Rashi. So רש״י Rashi is a little bit of a צריך עיון tzaruch iyun, this is a שווער shver רש״י Rashi. The critical מראה מקום mareh makom however in this discussion of is there הגסה hagasa on something that is מבושל כל צרכו meivushal kol tzarko is the כלבו Kolbo. The כלבו Kolbo is quoted by the בית יוסף Beis Yosef in סימן רנ״ג siman resh-nun-gimmel, סעיף ד׳ se'if daled, דיבור המתחיל dibbur hamaschil כתב בנימוקי יוסף kasav b'nimukei yosef, page ס״ו samech-vav in the fancy טור Tur, where the כלבו Kolbo writes as follows. I'm going to read to you his לשון lashon. This is a quote from the כלבו Kolbo. שיש ליזהר מלתת מים חמין בעוד הקדרה על האש sheyeish lehizaher milaseis mayim chamin be'od hakedairah al ha'eish. You should be careful to not put hot water into, pour hot water into a pot that's on the fire. Obviously, okay, let's let him speak. לפי שהן מערבות ומגיסות בקדרה כדי לערב יפה lefi shehein me'arvos umegisos bokedairah kedei le'arev yafeh. Because if you pour water into the pot, everything's going to get mixed all together and the contents are going to get all stirred. וקיימא לן דמגיס חייב משום מבשל vekaima lan demagis chayav mishum mevushal. And we פסקן pasken that מגיס magis is חייב chayav for מבשל mevushal. אפילו בקדרה מבושלת afilu bokedairah mevusheles, even in a pot that is already cooked, כל זמן שהיא על האש kol zman shehi al ha'eish, as long as it's still on the fire. So here מפורש meforash in the כלבו Kolbo that if the pot is still on the fire, there is an איסור הגסה issur hagasah even on what's מבושל כל צורכו mevushal kol tzorcho. The שער הציון Sha'ar Hatziyun, if you have a משנה ברורה Mishnah Berurah in front of you, it's כדאי kedai to see this inside. The שער הציון Sha'ar Hatziyun סימן שי\"ח Siman Shin-Yud-Ches, סעיף קטן קמ\"ח Seif Katan Koof-Mem-Ches, goes crazy about this כלבו Kolbo. שער הציון Sha'ar Hatziyun סימן שי\"ח Siman Shin-Yud-Ches, סעיף קטן קמ\"ח Seif Katan Koof-Mem-Ches, take a look. He says, he says, ולא ידעתי הטעם velo yadati hata'am. I don't understand this. דמאי עדיפא הגסה מבישול ממש demai adifa hagasah mibishul mamash? How can הגסה hagasah be more חמור chamur than actual cooking? וכל הפוסקים מודים דבמבושל כל צורכו אין בו משום בישול vechol haposkim modim debemevushal kol tzorcho ein bo mishum bishul. All the פוסקים poskim agree that if something is fully cooked, there's no בישול bishul. וכן איתא בתוספתא בהדיא vechein isa bosephta behedya. It's מפורש meforash in תוספתא Tosephta. ועל כל פנים בדיעבד בודאי אין לאסור בזה כדאשכחן פוסקים ve'al kol panim bedi'eved bevadai ein le'esor bezeh kedashkachan poskim. The שער הציון Sha'ar Hatziyun is he throws up his hands. He says what's going on with this כלבו Kolbo? It's, it's very hard to figure out this כלבו Kolbo. So three approaches. Two are given by רב משה Rav Moshe in the אגרות משה Igros Moshe, אורח חיים Orach Chayim, חלק ד' Chelek Daled, סימן ע\"ד Siman Ayin-Daled, בישול אות ט' bishul os Tes. רב משה Rav Moshe says it could be that answer number one, the כלבו Kolbo was concerned for קדירה שעדין לא נתבשלה kedairah she'adayin lo nisbashlah, meaning maybe there's something in the pot that didn't yet get cooked. So the כלבו'ס Kolbo's חושש choshesh for it. That's very hard. I mean, are we going to start אוסר'ינג osering החזרה hachazarah on everything that's מבושל כל צורכו mevushal kol tzorcho because maybe something is not cooked and you're going to do בישול bishul? That's a very hard answer of רב משה Rav Moshe. Meaning and you do have to be certain that it's מבושל כל צורכו mevushal kol tzorcho before you do הגסה hagasah, but you always have to be certain it's מבושל כל צורכו mevushal kol tzorcho before you do החזרה hachazarah or anything of that nature. So we clearly have times when you're allowed to rely on the fact that you know it's מבושל כל צורכו mevushal kol tzorcho. The next answer רב משה Rav Moshe there in אות י' os Yud, it's the next תשובה tshuvah in אות י' os Yud, he quotes the ספר תפארת שמואל Sefer Tiferes Shmuel who says that it's a מראית עין maris ayin issue, that people watching, onlookers might not know that it's מבושל כל צורכו mevushal kol tzorcho. Okay, that's also hard. Like are we going to אוסר oser every החזרה hachazarah because on... it's hard. I mean, we טאקע takeh do אוסר oser every החזרה hachazarah because of מחזי כמבשל mechzi kimevushal. So okay, meaning אין הכי נמי ein hachi nami, maybe then that is what רב משה Rav Moshe means here, some type of מחזי כמבשל mechzi kimevushal. מחזי כמבשל mechzi kimevushal itself is a question. I don't think we discussed this because more far afield, this is like when we learn פרק כירה Perek Kirah בעיון be'iyun, but does מחזי כמבשל mechzi kimevushal is the פשט pshat that for you it looks like cooking or the פשט pshat is that onlookers might think you're cooking? Right, what's the פשט pshat in מחזי כמבשל mechzi kimevushal? So if רב משה Rav Moshe thinks that it's that onlookers will think you're cooking and so then maybe, maybe this would, this would make sense here as well? I don't know. I don't know, but that's what רב משה Rav Moshe says. רב משה Rav Moshe there suggests a נפקא מינה nafka mina. I'm just going to tell it to you in case one of you can explain it to me. I don't fully understand why this is a נפקא מינה nafka mina, but רב משה Rav Moshe says a נפקא מינה nafka mina between the two answers is whether you're allowed to put a cover on a pot when it's fully cooked. רב משה Rav Moshe thinks that, right, you're never allowed to put a cover on a pot that's not fully cooked because when you cover the pot, you're trapping the heat and that enhances the בישול bishul. רב משה Rav Moshe thinks that if you hold like the first answer here, so you'd be allowed to put a pot cover on something that's fully cooked, and if you hold like the second answer, it'll be אסור assur. I don't understand why that would be a נפקא מינה nafka mina. If somebody could look it up and explain it to me, I would be very grateful. You have a פשט pshat? No. It was fully cooked in with all in the same liquid. I don't know if actually adding, if trapping the heat inside... No, but why, but why would it be a difference between רב משה'ס Rav Moshe's two answers? רב משה Rav Moshe thinks according to the first answer of חשש chashash that something didn't get cooked, it's מותר mutar, and according to the second answer of מראית עין maris ayin, it would be אסור assur. I suppose if things, it's all in like a liquid or whatnot. If the thing that's not fully cooked is on the bottom, making the top or whatnot isn't going to necessarily make anything else in the pot cook. It won't? Not as much. Is that true? But if it is in fact, then it wouldn't be מחזי כמבשל mechzi kimevushal because it's not... wouldn't בישול bishul be... No, but he's the idea is that it would be מחזי כמבשל mechzi kimevushal because somebody, an onlooker, would think the whole pot is raw. I hear what you're saying. If those facts are correct, I hear what you're saying. It's just is that true that it wouldn't speed up at all if you trapped the heat even if it's on the bottom? Probably not. I don't know. I don't know, but I hear, but I hear the logic. Look up the תשובה tshuvah and let me know if you think that's what he's saying. I hear your logic, but let's take a look at the תשובה tshuvah. I hear. One thing that... You need to say according to רב משה Rav Moshe just off the bat is the לשון lashon of the כל בו Kol Bo was חייב chayav, right? He said מגיס meigis is חייב chayav משום מבשל mishum mevashel. So according to רב משה Rav Moshe, חייב chayav is clearly לאו דווקא lav davka. So because חייב chayav is an איסור דאורייתא isur de-Oraita. Okay. Rabbi Wiederblank suggested an additional answer, again going back to our רמב\"ם Rambam. Maybe הגסה hagasa is מצורכי הבישול mitzorchei habishul. It's not בישול ממש bishul mamash. If it's מצורכי הבישול mitzorchei habishul, even if something is מבושל כל צרכו mevushal kol tzorko, again, it's the final step in the whole בישול bishul process. So maybe that's what the רמב\"ם Rambam is, maybe that's what the כל בו Kol Bo is talking about. הלכה למעשה Halacha le-ma'aseh, how do we פסק pasken in שלחן ערוך Shulchan Aruch? So when all is said and done. So if you have a שלחן ערוך Shulchan Aruch in front of you, סימן שיח סעיף יח Siman Shin Yud-Chet Se'if Yud-Chet is the סעיף se'if about הגסה hagasa. And the שלחן ערוך Shulchan Aruch writes as follows: האלפס והקדרה שהעבירן מרותחין מעל גבי האור Ha-ilpas veha-kedeira she-he'eviran merutachin me'al gabei ha-ur, right, so every word here is critical. The a pan or a pot that you took it hot off the fire, okay, so we're dealing with something that is not on the fire, very important. אם לא נתבשל כל צרכו אין מוציאין בכף מהם Im lo nitbashel kol tzorko ein motzi'in bekaf mehem, if it is not fully cooked you're not allowed to ladle out of that pot, שנמצא מגיס she-nimtza meigis, because it turns out that you're stirring, ויש כאן משום מבשל ve-yesh kan mishum mevashel, and that would be a violation of בישול bishul. ואם נתבשל כל צרכו מותר Ve-im nitbashel kol tzorko mutar. If it's fully cooked, it's מותר mutar. So the שלחן ערוך Shulchan Aruch says that if you have a fully cooked pot not on the fire, you're allowed to ladle out of that pot. אבל צמר ליורה אף על פי שקלט העין אסור להגיס בו Aval tzemar leyora af al pi she-kalat ha-ayin asur lehagis bo, that's a צובע tzovei'a issue, you wouldn't be allowed to. Fine, that's the שלחן ערוך Shulchan Aruch. Look at the רמ\"א Rama. The רמ\"א Rama writes: ולכתחילה יש ליזהר אף בקדרה בכל ענין U-lekhat-chila yesh lizaher af bi-kedeira be-khol inyan. The רמ\"א Rama quotes from the פסקי מהרי\"ו Piskei Mahariw, which is the מהרי\"ו Mahariw. So the מהרי\"ו Mahariw says לכתחילה lekhat-chila we should be מחמיר machmir not only about צמר ליורה tzemar leyora, but also a קדרה kedeira of food בכל ענין be-khol inyan. Okay, how far is the רמ\"א Rama going here with this בכל ענין be-khol inyan? Right, there are levels to this. Is the רמ\"א Rama saying, right the מחבר Mechaber said that הגסה hagasa is only אסור asur on something that is not מבושל כל צרכו mevushal kol tzorko. So is the רמ\"א Rama saying that הגסה hagasa is אסור asur if it is מבושל כל צרכו mevushal kol tzorko but not הוצאה בכף hotza'ah bekaf? Or is he saying even הוצאה בכף hotza'ah bekaf is אסור asur? Or a third possibility, is the רמ\"א Rama saying that it's אסור asur to do הגסה hagasa or הוצאה בכף hotza'ah bekaf only when it's not on the fire... when it's only when it's on the fire, I'm sorry, but not when it's no longer on the fire? Right, there are different חילוקים chilukim here that you could make. So how much is the רמ\"א Rama אוסר oser? So the מגן אברהם Magen Avraham in סעיף קטן מד se'if katan mem-dalet makes a comment, he doesn't address this question, but he makes a comment that sheds light on this question. The מגן אברהם Magen Avraham in סעיף קטן מד se'if katan mem-dalet says the מנהג העולם minhag ha-olam is to be מקיל meikil to ladle מיני קטניות minei kitniyos, right, in פסח Pesach mode, to ladle out let's say, you know, beans out of a pot because אי אפשר בענין אחר ee efshar be-inyan acher. So meaning what? Meaning the מגן אברהם Magen Avraham is saying there's something that the רמ\"א Rama thinks we should be מחמיר machmir about, but the מנהג העולם minhag ha-olam is to be מקיל meikil because אי אפשר בענין אחר ee efshar be-inyan acher. So that's משמע mashma that the מגן אברהם Magen Avraham is אוסר oser even הוצאה בכף hotza'ah bekaf, even not on the fire, even מבושל כל צרכו mevushal kol tzorko, right, because otherwise why would the מגן אברהם Magen Avraham need to say that the reason we do it is because אי אפשר בענין אחר ee efshar be-inyan acher? So that's a very, very big חומרא chumra. You would never be allowed to ladle out of a pot even when it's not on the fire. A pot that was on the fire, a כלי ראשון kli rishon. You'd never be allowed to ladle out of a כלי ראשון kli rishon even if it's no longer on the fire. The משנה ברורה Mishna Berura סעיף קטן קיז se'if katan kuf-yud-zayin, if you have it in front of you, so the משנה ברורה Mishna Berura writes as follows. משנה ברורה Mishna Berura says on the רמ\"א Rama אף בקדרה af bi-kedeira, אלא יהפוך הקדרה לקערה ולא יוציא בכף ela ya-hafokh ha-kedeira le-ke'ara ve-lo yotzi be-khaf, meaning how are you supposed to get the things out of the pot if you can't ladle out? Pour it out. So, but you can't ladle out. Then the משנה ברורה Mishna Berura writes ועיין באחרונים דלא נהגין להחמיר בזה Ve-ayein ba-Acharonim de-lo nahigin le-hachmir be-zeh. The אחרונים Acharonim say we are not, we are not מחמיר machmir like the, like the רמ\"א Rama. Meaning the רמ\"א Rama טאקע takka was מחמיר machmir on everything, but we're not as מחמיר machmir as the רמ\"א Rama. דבאמת העיקר כמו שכתבנו מתחילה דמבושל כל צרכו אפילו להגיס מותר De-be-emet ha-ikar kemo she-katavnu mi-tchila de-mevushal kol tzorko afilu lehagis mutar. מעיקר הדין Me-ikar ha-din, if it's מבושל כל צרכו mevushal kol tzorko, הגסה hagasa is not אסור asur, right? Remember the שער הציון Sha'ar Ha-Tziyun ולוואי אדע הטעם ve-levai eda ha-ta'am, the שער הציון Sha'ar Ha-Tziyun could not understand this כל בו Kol Bo. מעיקר הדין Me-ikar ha-din we do not פסק pasken like this כל בו Kol Bo. It's a תמוה כל בו tamua Kol Bo. וכמבואר לקמן סימן שיח סוף סעיף יט U-kmevo'ar lekaman siman shin-yud-chet sof se'if yud-tet. Now the משנה ברורה Mishna Berura rules למעשה le-ma'aseh. He says והרוצה להחמיר ve-ha-rotzeh le-hachmir, mean it's important to know, he was saying that's the עיקר הדין ikar ha-din. Meaning the עיקר הדין ממש ikar ha-din mamash. It's important to know what is מעיקר הדין me-ikar ha-din and what are חומרות chumros. Even if, even if we recommend the משנה ברורה Mishna Berura's חומרות chumros sometimes when the מנהג העולם minhag ha-olam is to follow them, but the, but it's important to know what is מעיקר הדין me-ikar ha-din and what's a חומרא chumra. מעיקר הדין Me-ikar ha-din the משנה ברורה Mishna Berura rest... If somebody does הגסה hagasah on a fully cooked pot, that is מותר לגמרי muttar l'gamrei, משנה ברורה Mishnah Berurah says. Even if it's on the fire, if it's fully cooked, there is no problem, says the משנה ברורה Mishnah Berurah. Then the משנה ברורה Mishnah Berurah says והרוצה להחמיר v'harotzeh l'hachmir, if one wants to be מחמיר machmir, יחמיר בהגסה ממש yachmir b'hagasah mamash, be מחמיר machmir on actual stirring. אבל להוציא בכף Aval l'hotzi b'chaf, but ladling out, אין להחמיר כלל בנתבשלה כל צרכה ואינה על האש ein l'hachmir klal b'nisbashla kol tzorka v'eina al ha'esh. There is no reason to be מחמיר machmir on ladling out of a pot if it's מבושל כל צרכו mevushal kol tzorko and it's not on the fire. So bottom line הלכה למעשה halacha l'maiseh, what do we have in the משנה ברורה Mishnah Berurah? We have the עיקר דין ikar din and we have the רוצה להחמיר rotzeh l'hachmir, right? The עיקר דין ikar din is if it's מבושל כל צרכו mevushal kol tzorko, you're good to go. מבושל כל צרכו Mevushal kol tzorko, you know, you're good, you're checked, you're approved. You could do הגסה hagasah, you could do הוצאה בכף hotzaah b'chaf, on the fire, not on the fire, it doesn't matter. That's the עיקר הדין ikar hadin. והרוצה להחמיר v'harotzeh l'hachmir says the משנה ברורה Mishnah Berurah has gradations. If the pot is still on the fire, can't touch it. Can't ladle out or stir. You're going to have to pour the contents out. If the pot is not on the fire, you cannot do הגסה hagasah, but you can ladle out. Fine. So let's end with a very הלכה למעשה halacha l'maiseh שאלה shaila. Very למעשה l'maiseh שאלה shaila. Let's say there is something called Friday night cholent. Apparently now there's something called Thursday night cholent, right? Outside in Kerem B'Yavneh was always Thursday night cholent. I think now in the wider world, they also have a Thursday night cholent in many places. But, okay. Was it higher back at Kerem B'Yavneh? That I don't know. So what if a person wants to have Friday night cholent and Shabbos day cholent? But they only have one crockpot. That's what you do. So what's the issue? The crockpot, again how's the crockpot made? You have the outside and you have the inside. So what are you going to do? Friday night you're going to take off the cover of your crockpot. Now your cholent's fully cooked. If the cholent's not fully cooked, you can't take off that cover. But cholent's fully cooked, fine. So now you want to ladle out? Can't ladle out, it's on the fire. Right? משנה ברורה Mishnah Berurah said והרוצה להחמיר v'harotzeh l'hachmir on the fire, you can't ladle out. So what are you going to do? You're going to take the insert out, bring it over to the table in the KB, put it down on the table, start ladling out, and then we'll put it back in? Oh, can't do that, that's חזרה hachzara. So you'll tell me oh no, so good thing we have a lot of guys here. One guy will take the pot out על דעת להחזיר al daas l'hachzir. He'll hold the pot the entire time while somebody else is ladling out, then he'll put it back in. עודו בידו Oido b'yado, על דעת להחזיר al daas l'hachzir. We're going to have to make a בלעך blech inside our crockpot, we're going to have to line it, גרופה וקטומה grufa u'ktuma. Good to go. רבותי Rabbosai, that's תוכה tochah, right? Rabbi Willig said that to put back inside the crockpot is תוכה tochah. חזרה Hachzara is never מותר muttar when you're talking about תוכה tochah. So we have two options: buy a second crockpot or don't eat Friday night cholent, right? What else are you going to do? So there's a very important חזון איש Chazon Ish. The חזון איש Chazon Ish is in סימן לז אות טו Siman lamed zayin os tes vav. And the חזון איש Chazon Ish says that in a situation in which it will be impossible to fulfill the תנאי חזרה tnai hachzara, you're allowed to ladle out from on the fire directly as long as it's מבושל כל צרכו mevushal kol tzorko. It's already a חומרא chumra that we're not ladling out when something is מבושל כל צרכו mevushal kol tzorko. So if you could fulfill the תנאי חזרה tnai hachzara, if you weren't dealing with a crockpot, it was just on a stovetop, so בסדר beseder, take it off and put it back, you know עודו בידו ודעתו להחזיר oido b'yado v'daato l'hachzir, גרופה וקטומה grufa u'ktuma, and then stovetop with a בלעך blech, גרופה וקטומה grufa u'ktuma, so then you'd be okay. But if it's impossible to fulfill the תנאי חזרה tnai hachzara, so the חזון איש Chazon Ish is מיקל meikel on הוצאה בכף hotzaah b'chaf again provided that it's fully cooked. רב משה Rav Moshe is מחמיר machmir. רב משה Rav Moshe in that same תשובה tshuva I was quoting to you from before, this is in again אגרות משה Igros Moshe, אורח חיים Orach Chaim, חלק ד Chelek daled, סימן עד Siman ayin daled, בישול אות י Bishul os yud. רב משה Rav Moshe is מחמיר machmir and says you can't. Rabbi Willig in his English בישול Bishul ספר sefer on page 34 quotes the חזון איש Chazon Ish, but doesn't say whether he holds like it. He just brings down the חזון איש Chazon Ish. So I heard from Rabbi Wiederblank that Rabbi Willig is מיקל meikel like that חזון איש Chazon Ish. So הלכה למעשה halacha l'maiseh, so if you want to eat Friday night cholent and you're in this situation, if it's impossible to fulfill the תנאי חזרה tnai hachzara because of what we were just discussing, provided that the cholent is מבושל כל צרכו mevushal kol tzorko, you can ladle out from inside the crockpot. I'll just make a caveat, this is obvious what I'm about to say but just so nobody should misunderstand: here when we eat cholent on Friday night... You're not eating it on שבת Shabbos day also, it's just the Friday night טשולנט cholent, so that you should definitely take it out and never put it back in because you're not leaving over anything there. It's obviously better to not ladle it out if you could take it out, here you don't lose anything by taking it out. In a situation though where you're saving your טשולנט cholent for שבת Shabbos lunch, then what we're discussing would apply. Okay, יישר כוח shkoach.