5786/2025
Cooked Sugar, Cooked Salt, and Instant Coffee
The Mishnah Berurah (318:71) notes that if salt was cooked during its processing, we may even place it on food in a Kli Rishon if the Kli Rishon was removed from the fire. The Mishnah Berurah says that the same applies to sugar that was cooked during its processing. He notes, however, that Rav Akiva Eiger (at the end of O.C. 253; and see Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 1:note 138) questions this ruling. Rav Akiva Eiger believes that a solid item designated to be melted and turned into a liquid may have the status of a liquid. Accordingly, the Ein Bishul Achar Bishul rule does not apply even to cooked salt and sugar. The Mishnah Berurah concludes that it is best to avoid placing salt and sugar in a Kli Rishon. He permits relying on the lenient opinions regarding a Kli Sheini.
Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata (1:49) notes the many applications of this rule. They include instant coffee, instant tea, soup bouillon, powdered milk, and powdered cocoa. The Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata follows the Mishnah Berurah and recommends avoiding placing any of these items in a Kli Rishon. However, Rav Ovadia Yosef (Teshuvot Yechaveh Da’at 2:44) endorses the lenient view as it is supported by leading Poskim such as Rav Zvi Pesach Frank and Rav Yechiel Yaakov Weinberg.
Cooking after Baking
The Beit Yosef (318 s.v. V’katav Harav Eliezer Mi’Metz) cites a celebrated dispute concerning Ein Bishul Achar Bishul’s scope. He cites the Sefer Yere’im who limits it to identical processes such as cooking after cooking, baking after baking, or roasting after roasting. However, he forbids dissimilar processes, such as cooking after baking or roasting after cooking. The Beit Yosef, though, quotes the Raavya who adopts an expansive view of Ein Bishul Achar Bishul. He rules that it applies even to dissimilar processes, such as cooking after baking. A ramification of this dispute is whether one may place bread in very hot (Yad Soledet Bo) soup.
In the Beit Yosef, Rav Yosef Karo cites the many Talmudic texts cited by both the Yereim and the Raavya as proof for their respective opinions. In the Shulchan Aruch (318:5), Rav Karo mentions both the Yere’im and the Ra’avya (Yesh Mi SheOmer and Yesh Matirim) without explicitly endorsing either opinion.
Sephardic Practice
Rav Ovadia Yosef (Livyat Chein 318:49) believes that Rav Karo accepts the lenient opinion since he presents it second. Rav Ovadia notes that when Rav Karo presents both opinions as “there are those who say and those who say”, the second view is primary (since he gives it the last word). Moreover, Rav Ovadia notes that Rav Karo presents the Yere’im’s view as Yesh Mi SheOmer in the singular and the Ra’avyah’s opinion in the plural Yesh Matirim, signaling that the Ra’avyah has greater support. Nonetheless, Rav Ben Zion Abba Sha’ul (Teshuvot Ohr L’Tzion 2:30:6) favors stringency, since a Torah prohibition is at stake.
Ashkenazic Practice
However, the Rama records the Ashkenazic custom to refrain from placing bread in Yad Soledet Bo soup even in a Kli Sheini since there would be cooking after baking. Interestingly, the Shemirat Shabbat KeHilchata (1:61) permits placing fried soup croutons or fried noodles into Yad Soledet Bo soup, since deep frying is the Halachic equivalent of cooking (Sanhedrin 4b with Rashi d”h Derech Bishul and Mishnah Berurah 451:65).
The Mishnah Berurah (318:47) rules leniently if the soup is in a Kli Shelishi. He believes that the possibility that cooking does not occur in a Kli Shelishi, in addition to the Ra’avyah’s view, support a lenient ruling. Thus, he permits placing Challah in very hot soup, if the soup is in a Kli Shelishi.
Ladle Status
This Mishnah Berurah combines the possibility that a ladle is a Kli Sheini with the Ra’avyah’s leniency. Poskim debate whether a ladle used to remove hot food from a Kli Rishon is regarded as a Kli Rishon or a Kli Sheni. The Maharil (cited by the Taz, Yoreh Deah 92:30) views a ladle as a Kli Sheni. The Taz (ibid.) sharply challenges the Maharil’s view, arguing that since the ladle was immersed in a Kli Rishon, it assumes the status of a Kli Rishon. The Mishnah Berurah has seemingly contradictory indications regarding this question (compare 318:45 with 253:84 and 318:87). We may resolve the contradiction by saying that the Mishnah Berurah rules leniently regarding a ladle in combination with the Ra’avyah’s lenient view.
The Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata (1:59 with footnote 180) regards a ladle as a Kli Sheini in this context, provided that the ladle was not immersed for a “long period” in the hot pot. A ladle becomes a Kli Rishon if it remains in the hot pot for a significant amount of time. The Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata does not define what he regards as a “long period.”
Mishnah Berurah 318:87 and Yalkut Yosef Orach Chaim 318:87 support the standard of the ladle being a Kli Rishon if it was immersed in the Kli Rishon until steam rises from the ladle’s contents. Rav Willig (Cooking and Warming Food on Shabbat, pp. 76-77) supports this standard.
Warming Challah on a Blech
Rav Shmuel Fuerst permits placing Challah on a pot to warm on Shabbat as long as it does not change color or become crispy. Although there is considerable debate about whether one can make toast on Shabbat, it is permissible to warm up the bread without the intention to make toast.
My wife Malca advises wrapping the Challah in one layer of aluminum foil so that the heat will not dry out the bread and prevent it from becoming meaty.
Conclusion
The best way to avoid this question seems to be to wait to dip the Challah until the soup has cooled below Yad Soledet Bo. Recall from our prior articles that we may regard Yad Soledet Bo as 120 degrees Fahrenheit. Thus, the soup remains enjoyable even at a temperature lower than Yad Soledet Bo.
Similarly, a practical way to avoid the dispute regarding solids containing some liquid is to reheat such items in a way that they will not reach 120 degrees Fahrenheit.