According to your description, the cholent was k’ma’achal ben d’rosai (nominally edible) when you took it off the blech, but it was not mevushal kol tzorko (fully cooked). According to the most accepted opinion, returning such food until it cooks fully is a Torah-level violation of cooking on Shabbat.[2] When you spooned out some cholent, you also violated a less severe prohibition of meigis (stirring). In the case of non-fully cooked food, this prohibition applies even when one just removes food with a spoon, even when the pot is off the fire.[3] In general, we urge cholent preparers to either cook the cholent long and/or hard enough to ensure that it is fully cooked before Shabbat or to refrain from handling it (including its lid) until the morning.
Is food that was handled improperly in the cooking process forbidden b’di’eved?[4] The answer depends on the nature of the violation. There are two categories of problems involved in returning food to a heat source on Shabbat. One issue is the actual cooking, which may include a Torah prohibition when the food was not fully cooked and, according to many, even when reheating a fully cooked liquid.[5] The other is the Rabbinic prohibition of improperly putting even cooked foods on a heat source (chazara) in cases in which the Rabbis were concerned that one might adjust the fire or that it might look like the person is cooking.[6]
Regarding cooking, the Shulchan Aruch[7] rules that even if a food was cooked b’shogeg (by mistake), it may not be eaten on Shabbat.[8] However, the Mishna Berura[9] says that in a case of need, one may rely on the opinion that when Shabbat was violated b’shogeg, the result is permitted b’di’eved. The case you describe is one of shogeg, and whether the cholent was permissable would thus seem to depend on these opinions.
There is another reason to be lenient b’di’eved as well. Although we generally follow the stringent view, the Rashba and several other authorities[10] maintain that the prohibition of cooking does not apply after the food is k’ma’achal ben d’rosai. The logic is that since the Torah forbids cooking raw food to the point of k’ma’achal ben d’rosai, k’ma’achal ben d’rosai food must be considered halachically cooked, after which point there is no prohibition. As a rule, when we accept a stringent position but one acted according to the view of important authorities who rule leniently, the result is not prohibited b’di’eved.[11] This applies to our case due to the Rashba’s opinion. It is true that there is a dispute regarding whether the Rashba completely permitted cooking k’ma’achal ben d’rosai food or whether he meant that there is no Torah level prohibition to do so, while there is a Rabbinic one.[12] However, even if the latter interpretation is correct, one can be lenient in your case, as if one violates a Rabbinic enactment on Shabbat b’shogeg, the resulting product is permitted b’di’eved.[13]
Paradoxically, we are more stringent regarding the result of the violation of the Rabbinic prohibition of chazara, as in the case of chazara, we treat b’shogeg acts as if they were meizid (intentional). This is due to the concern that someone will purposely violate these rules, which he might view lightly, and claim that he did so b’shogeg.[14] Therefore, one may not benefit on Shabbat from the fact that he violated the rules of chazara when he returned food to the flame, even if he did so b’shogeg.
There are five basic conditions that must be met in order to permit chazara: 1) The flame is covered; 2) one kept his hand on the pot; 3) he intended to return the food to a heat source; 4) the food is fully cooked; 5) the food is slightly warm.[15] In your case, a nominally cooked food was returned to the blech, and requirement #4 was therefore violated. It would thus seem that the food is forbidden to eat.[16]
However, one has to know the logic of any given requirement of chazara in order to determine its parameters. The first three requirements are related to chazara per se and are governed by its strict rules regarding b’di’eved. In your case, you did nothing wrong in that regard. The problem in your situation lies in the fact that the food was not fully cooked. However, that requirement was instituted only to avoid cooking, not due to the special rules of chazara.[17] In fact, according to the lenient opinions regarding cooking k’ma’achal ben d’rosai foods, chazara was permitted in your case.[18] Therefore, based on the same analysis that we used above, there was no prohibiton b’di’eved, and the cholent was permitted.