A Note Regarding Soltam Pots, Hagalah & More

9 Nissim 5774
April 9, 2014
The following information is taken from the Badatz Eida Chareidis 5774 Guide and the opinion expressed is that of the hashgacha.

The Eida Chareidis is of the opinion that new pots require ‘hagalah’ before use with the exception of pots that say they were kashered by the hashgacha.

The Eida oints out Soltam® pots fraudulently display its hashgacha, claiming the pots do not require hagalah when this is not the case. The guide says Soltam pots require hagalah and must be toiveled despite the company claiming they do not.

The Eida feels that stainless steel and aluminum pots require hagalah for fear they have been coated with prohibited oil in production. The same holds true for silver cups and other items, also coated with a prohibited substance and requiring hagalah.

Vessels requiring both hagalah and tevila should first undergo hagalah, and then they can be toiveled. The Eida adds that in line with the ruling of the Minchas Yitzchak ZT”L and HaGaon HaRav Shmuel Halevy Wosner Shlita, if a merchant toivels a vessel for the customer the tevila is invalid if it was done prior to the sale and acquisition.

Durolex® and Pyrex® and from abroad and require tevila as well.


  • Susan
    April 9, 2014 - 18:23 | Permalink

    Soltam has a special Customer Service department for the religious population. I spoke with them about a month ago, and this is what they told me:

    The pots are coated very lightly (to protect against scratches in transport) with a vegetable oil, which comes off easily and completely with regular dishwashing liquid.

    They said that Rav Ovadiah Yosef paskened that the pots don’t need hagala, and that the Eidah Chareidis ruled that it is necessary.

    They have a line of pots which come already toiveled. (I guess those are the ones Rav Wosner was referring to.)

  • Miriam
    April 9, 2014 - 23:04 | Permalink

    I would like to see more opinions besides the Eida , Rav Wosner, and Rav Ovadia Yosef and the Minchas Yitzchak. on the issue of these pots. Even if you add ” as your own Rav” would help.

    As to Durolex & Pyrex; you state ‘and require Tevila as well’. As well as what??
    If this is a typo please correct; if not then what else is required for Durolex & Pyrex?
    You should have an answer for the Kahal ASAP

  • Benseon
    April 10, 2014 - 11:36 | Permalink

    An excellent, cogent halachic analysis of this issue was written some years ago by Rav Yehuda Spitz of Ohr Somayach – “Kashering New Pots for Pesach?!” http://ohr.edu/this_week/insights_into_halacha/5111

  • cmb
    April 10, 2014 - 11:46 | Permalink

    you want more opinons? this was addressed in article right here on this very website several years ago! Here – I found it.


    also in the new madrich badatz writes explicitly that it is only a chumra not m’dina

  • Tsvi Rogin
    April 11, 2014 - 10:50 | Permalink

    If the pot was produced by goyim and then sold to Yidden, it needs tevila, but if the Yid who owns the store toivels it prior to selling it to another Yid, why should it need tevila again? If the factory toiveled it and then sold it to a goyishe wholesaler or something along that line, then the original tevila is gone, but if it goes from Yid to Yid, what is the problem?

  • Comments are closed.