4. Question:What exactly is the leniency of “residual heat” that is used to avoid pas akum? Introduction: There is a Rabbinical prohibition of pas akum on bread baked by non-Jews (Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De’ah Siman 112 Se’if 1), even if it is certain that only kosher ingredients went into the bread and even if the bread is baked in a kosher oven. If a Jew participated in the baking process, either by lighting the fire used to bake the bread, or by placing the dough into the oven, or by adjusting the fire, this participation suffices to permit the bread, and it will not be classified pas akum (Shulchan Aruch ibid Se’if 9). Additionally, it also suffices if a Jew adds some fuel to the fire used to bake with (Shulchan Aruch ibid) and the bread baked with this fire will not be considered pas akum. Discussion: The Mordechai in Avodoh Zoro (Siman 830) mentions an incident where an oven was used to bake with three times during one day, and the third time the oven was used, a Jew was not “machshir” the oven [by adding some fuel to the fire]. The Mordechai writes that since some hot coals from the previous baking (where a Jew was machshir the oven) remained in the oven during the third baking, the bread baked during this third baking is permitted [and not pas akum, because this is considered significant enough participation of the Jew]. The Mordechai concludes that [although the bread is permitted] he refrained from ruling leniently in this situation. The Beis Yosef (Yoreh De’ah Siman 112 [10]) quotes this Mordechai and rules similarly to the Mordechai in Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De’ah Siman 112 Se’if 10) where he writes that if a Jew was machshir the oven during the first two rounds of baking and was not machshir the oven for the third round of baking, the bread is permitted. However, the view of the Issur v’Heter (Sha’ar 44 Se’if 10) is that residual heat (from previous uses of the oven where a Jew was machshir the oven) is significant enough to permit bread baked in the oven [by a non-Jew] ex post facto. The Issur v’Heter explains that the residual heat in the oven expedites the current baking and writes that it is easier to re-heat an oven when the oven has been used the day before, compared to heating an oven where the oven had not been used the day before. The Aruch Hashulchan (Siman 112 Se’if 27) writes about various leniencies mentioned in this Siman, including residual heat of the Remo “…these are all big leniencies and only in extenuating circumstances may they be relied upon. L’chatchilo we require one of the three types of involvement mentioned in the Gemoro; i.e. lighting the oven, stoking the coals or placing the bread into the oven.” Rav Elyashiv is also quoted (sefer Shulchan Melochim volume 1 page 434 footnote 31) as saying that this leniency should not be relied upon l’chatchilo and other methods of avoiding pas akum should be sought. Regarding contemporary domestic ovens it is indeed difficult to apply the leniency of the Remo. This is because contemporary ovens appear to be built very differently to the ovens present in the times of the Issur v’Heter and Remo and generally do not retain their heat after use for any significant amount of time. Therefore, ostensibly one can only be lenient in a situation where significant residual heat remains in the oven when it is next used to an extent where this will enable the oven to be heated faster and thus the residual heat contributes to the baking. However, the leniency of the Remo may be relevant regarding residual heat in industrial ovens found in bakeries and other large establishments which can be heated to temperatures exceeding 400°C and will retain significant levels of heat even after 24 hours of non-use. Conclusion: Regarding relying on residual heat (from a previous baking where there was some involvement of a Jew) to be considered participation of a Jew and thus no prohibition of pas akum, various Acharonim understand that the Shulchan Aruch does not rely on such a leniency (unless there are residual coals) and the bread baked in such an oven will be pas akum. However, it is clear from the Remo (Se’if 10) that residual heat will permit the bread baked in the oven and it will not be classified pas akum. From context, it appears that the leniency of the Remo can only be relied upon ex post facto (and according to the Aruch Hashulchan only under extenuating circumstances), and not l’chatchilo. In regard to contemporary domestic ovens, where the heat dissipates after a relatively short time it will be difficult to apply the leniency of the Remo (unless the subsequent baking occurs immediately after the first baking). The leniency of the Remo will be more relevant for industrial ovens that are used on very high temperatures and retain significant levels of heat for many hours after use. |
Pas Akum
Leave a Reply