We are continuing in siman 11, regarding the halachos of melting ice and snow. We last learned that it is muttar to melt sugar on Shabbos. The Chayei Adam brings two layers to the argument as to why it is muttar.
First, the Chayei Adam writes that it is muttar to pour hot water onto the sugar and there is no issue of bishul. We will learn that we do not use irui kli rishon for such a purpose, but it is muttar through irui kli sheini. (Kli rishon is defined as the vessel which is directly on the fire, and kli sheini is the vessel which was poured into from the kli rishon. Irui is the act of pouring from the respective kli onto the food in question, so irui kli rishon would be pouring from the kli rishon directly onto the sugar. Although irui kli rishon is assur, irui kli sheini, from the kli sheini directly onto the food, is muttar.)
Second, regarding the issue of melting the sugar, the Chayei Adam explains that it is different from melting ice or snow, because the sugar is still considered a food when it is melted, and it is not considered a liquid. In fact, if the liquid were to be boiled out of the cup, the sugar would remain and crystallize again. It does not approximate a mashkeh, and therefore it does not approximate nolad. Therefore, as the sugar remains a halachic food, there is no issue with pouring hot water on it. This explanation is the understanding of the Ben Ish Chai, who quotes this Chayei Adam in his sefer, Rav Pealim.
This understanding has applications regarding other foods as well, such as instant coffee. Regarding bishul, one cannot use a kli rishon, as we discussed, but one can perform irui from a kli sheini. Regarding the melting issue, one can pour water over the coffee, even though it will melt, because the coffee remains a halachic food.
According to the Chayei Adam, melting sugar or coffee does not have an issue of nolad either, since the resulting product is not considered a new entity.
Additionally, the Chayei Adam adds that it is muttar to place congealed fat on a hot piece of meat, even though one intends for the fat to melt. The melted fat is not considered a new entity, as it remains with the halachic status of a food both before and after it melts. We will discuss this case further in the upcoming shiur, be’ezras Hashem.
Summary
- It is muttar to melt sugar, coffee or meat fat in hot water (assuming one has taken care of issues of bishul). They remain a halachic food and do not assume the status of liquid.
We are continuing in siman 11, regarding the halachos of melting ice and snow. We learned about the concepts of nolad and muktzeh, and how the Sefer Haterumah holds that it is assur to melt ice or snow due to nolad.
The Shulchan Aruch, in siman 318:16, rejects the opinion of the Sefer Haterumah. He is discussing heating up food on Shabbos, and writes that although it is muttar to warm up food which is fully cooked, it cannot be too close to the fire out of concern that one may stir the coals. Therefore, the food must be placed at a bit of a distance, as a reminder not to stir the coals.
If the item comes with congealed liquid, many poskim understand that the result of the liquid congealing would be considered nolad, in that the liquid began as a solid and ended up becoming a liquid. Nevertheless, the Shulchan writes that there is no issue of nolad and the food can be placed at a distance, effectively rejecting the opinion of the Sefer Haterumah. The Rema brings the opinion of the Sefer Haterumah, and writes that one should be machmir in accordance with the Sefer Haterumah unless there is a specific need. The Mishnah Berurah concludes in accordance with the Rema as well.
In addition to the Sefer Haterumah, we learned two other approaches as to why it would be assur to melt snow or ice on Shabbos (shiur s389). The Rambam understands that it approximates sechita, and Rashi understands that the issue is molid, creating water.
In siman 320, the Shulchan Aruch approaches this question solely from the sechita issue. He writes that it is assur to crush snow or ice because it approximates sechita of fruits for their liquid. The Mishnah Berurah points out the third opinion, of Rashi, is not mentioned by the Shulchan Aruch at all.
The Shulchan Aruch continues, and writes that although it is assur to crush snow or ice, it is muttar to place ice into a cup and allow the ice to melt on its own. Allowing the ice to melt on its own does not approximate the act of squeezing, so the issue of the Rambam does not apply. According to Rashi, that the issue is being molid (creating) water, since it is happening by itself, he is not creating anything so the gezeira derabanan does not apply. Thus, both according to Rashi and the Rambam there is no issue.
If one wishes to stir the cup, arguably they hasten the melting process of the ice. However, the Chayei Adam writes that it is muttar, because the issur was enacted regarding liquid which becomes distinct from the solid from which it emanated. Over here, since the melted liquid is mixing into the liquid already into the cup, it is not discernable that the ice is being melted, so it is muttar. The Chayei Adam continues, and writes that therefore it is muttar to pour hot water on sugar, even though it will melt, because it never becomes distinct or discernable on its own. (There may be issues of bishul as well, which we will discuss separately.)
Summary
- The Shulchan Aruch understands that there is no issue of nolad when crushing ice on Shabbos, but there is an issue of sechita. Therefore, it is assur to crush ice directly, but it is muttar to allow for ice to indirectly melt, either by placing it in a cup with other liquid, or placing it near a heat source such that it melts on its own.
- Additonally, it is muttar to directly melt ice if the melted liquid is not discernable, such as if it melts and mixes directly into other liquids.
- The Rema holds that one should be machmir for the issue of nolad, unless there is a situation of specific need. Thus, according to the Rema, one should be machmir in the first two cases of the Shulchan Aruch mentioned above. We will discuss this further.
We are continuing in siman 11, regarding the halachos of melting ice and snow. We learned about the concepts of nolad and muktzeh, and how that plays out in regards to melting ice and snow.
The Gemara discusses rain, and whether one can use rain which falls on Shabbos. Obviously, water is muchan in the sense that people assume they will need water over Shabbos. However, one could argue that rainwater did not exist before Shabbos, so it should have the same issue of nolad. The Gemara in Eruvin explains that rainwater is different, because it was already in the clouds from before Shabbos. Thus, it is not full nolad, since a person has in mind that whenever the clouds release their water, they will use it. Rebbi Shimon is not concerned for nolad over here, since it had already existed in some form.
Tosfos (Beiah 2a) suggests that maybe even Rebbi Shimon, who is not concerned about nolad, will agree that a nolad gamur, something which had absolutely no existence before Shabbos, will be assur. For example, a window air conditioning unit works with coils that cool the air around it. Through the process, the natural water vapor in the atmosphere will gather on the coils and drip out. This water is water vapor which condenses through the coils. Even though there is water in the atmosphere, it does not exist, as far as humans are concerned, as it is not visible or touchable . If so, if it is converted into water, many poskim assume the water is nolad gamur and muktzeh. Thus, one could not drink that water or use that water for an animal, and so on. If the water drains into a utensil, the utensil will be muktzeh as well.
Tosfos explains that according to Rebbi Shimon, nolad is not an issue in cases where the item was in existence in a different form which changed over Shabbos. Thus, according to this explanation, snow or ice which turns into water should not be an issue. Although it changed form, it was pre-existing before Shabbos, so it is not nolad gamur.
The Sefer Haterumah, who is the author of the third explanation that melting ice or snow is assur due to nolad, appears to understand that even though Rebbi Shimon is more lenient in his understanding of muktzeh and would not have a issue of muktzeh with the snow or ice, he would be concerned for nolad, even though it is not nolad gamur.
This question might parallel a different question, which is how we look at liquids which were frozen and subsequently melted. On the one hand, we could consider the liquid as remaining in its inherent state, and it remains a liquid even while it is frozen. On the other hand, we could look at the solid state of the item as an indication that it is now a food, such that when it melts, it is nolad.
This question has multiple halachic ramifications.
- It is muttar to heat up a food which is fully cooked on Shabbos, but it is assur to heat up a liquid.
- Regarding hilchos brachos, if it is considered food, the shiur for bracha achrona is a kezayis, but if it is considered a mashkeh, the shiur will be a reviis which is drunk within the timeframe for drinking a reviis.
- Additionally, we do not make brachos on drinks during the meal, but we would make a bracha on a dessert at the end of a meal. Thus, for example, if ice cream is a food, it would receive a bracha, but if it is a liquid, it would not.
- Also, if it is a liquid, if it is eaten together for another food, it would require washing one’s hands (davar shetibulo b’mashkeh).
- There is a machlokes Rebbi Yehuda and Rebbi Shimon whether one’s items are by default designated for Shabbos use, or whether they must be deliberately designated.
- Arguably, all can agree that if the item did not exist before the onset of Shabbos, it is not possible to have designated it, so it will be muktzeh. This is known as nolad.
- Tosfos argues that Rebbi Shimon will agree that nolad gamur is assur, but something which existed in a different form will be muttar. The Sefer Haterumah understands that even this lower form of nolad will be assur according to Rebbi Shimon.
