Shabbat 36b:3-6שבת ל״ו ב:ג׳-ו׳
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save 'Shabbat 36b:3-6'
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
36bל״ו ב

למאי נפקא מינה לגיטי נשים:

What is the practical halakhic difference that emerges from this change of names? It is in the area of women’s bills of divorce. With regard to bills of divorce, special care is devoted to ensuring that the name of the place where the bill is written is not altered. Therefore, it is important to be aware that Babylon underwent a name change in later generations.



הדרן עלך במה מדליקין

מתני׳ כירה שהסיקוה בקש ובגבבא נותנים עליה תבשיל בגפת ובעצים לא יתן עד שיגרוף או עד שיתן את האפר בית שמאי אומרים חמין אבל לא תבשיל ובית הלל אומרים חמין ותבשיל בית שמאי אומרים נוטלין אבל לא מחזירין ובית הלל אומרים אף מחזירין:

MISHNA: With regard to a stove that was lit on Shabbat eve with straw or with rakings, scraps collected from the field, one may place a pot of cooked food atop it on Shabbat. The fire in this stove was certainly extinguished while it was still day, as both straw and rakings are materials that burn quickly. However, if the stove was lit with pomace, pulp that remains from sesame seeds, olives, and the like after the oil is squeezed from them, and if it was lit with wood, one may not place a pot atop it on Shabbat until he sweeps the coals from the stove while it is still day or until he places ashes on the coals, so that the fire will not ignite on Shabbat. Beit Shammai say: Even after one has swept away the coals, it is only permitted to place hot water on it, as it is sufficiently hot and does not require additional cooking, but not cooked food. Since, in general, one prefers that food will cook more, there is concern lest he come to ignite the fire by stoking the coals. And Beit Hillel say: Both hot water and cooked food may be placed. Beit Shammai say: One may remove a pot from the stove on Shabbat but may not return it. And Beit Hillel say: One may even return it.

גמ׳ איבעיא להו האי לא יתן לא יחזיר הוא אבל לשהות משהין אף על פי שאינו גרוף ואינו קטום ומני חנניה היא דתניא חנניה אומר כל שהוא כמאכל בן דרוסאי מותר לשהותו על גבי כירה אף על פי שאינו גרוף ואינו קטום או דילמא לשהות תנן ואי גרוף וקטום אין אי לא לא וכל שכן להחזיר

GEMARA: The students raised a dilemma with regard to the explanation of the mishna. That which we learned in the mishna: One may not place, does it mean that one may not return a pot that he took off the fire and wishes to return on Shabbat; however, to leave the pot from Shabbat eve into Shabbat, one may leave it even though this stove is not swept of its coals and its coals are not covered with ashes? And, according to this, whose opinion is it in this mishna? It is the opinion of Ḥananya. As it was taught in a baraita, Ḥananya says: Any food that has already been cooked to the extent of the food of ben Drosai, who would only cook his food the minimum amount necessary, one is permitted to leave it atop a stove on Shabbat even though the stove is not swept and not covered with ashes. Or perhaps, that which we learned in the mishna: One may not place, means one may not leave it on the fire from Shabbat eve. And if the coals in the stove were swept or covered with ashes, yes, one may leave the pot on the stove. And if not, no, one may not leave it, and all the more so one may not return it to the stove on Shabbat under any circumstances.

תא שמע מדקתני תרי בבי במתניתין בית שמאי אומרים חמין אבל לא תבשיל ובית הלל אומרים חמין ותבשיל בית שמאי אומרים נוטלין אבל לא מחזירין ובית הלל אומרים אף מחזירין אי אמרת בשלמא לשהות תנן הכי קתני כירה שהסיקוה בקש ובגבבא משהין עליה תבשיל בגפת ובעצים לא ישהא עד שיגרוף או עד שיתן אפר ומה הן משהין בית שמאי אומרים חמין אבל לא תבשיל ובית הלל אומרים חמין ותבשיל וכי היכי דפליגי בלשהות פליגי נמי בלהחזיר שבית שמאי אומרים נוטלין אבל לא מחזירין ובית הלל אומרים אף מחזירין

In order to resolve this dilemma, the Gemara suggests: Come and hear a resolution to this from the fact that two sections were taught in our mishna. In the first, Beit Shammai say: Hot water but not cooked food. And Beit Hillel say: Both hot water and cooked food. And in the second, Beit Shammai say: One may remove it but may not return it. And Beit Hillel say: One may even return it. Granted, if you say that when we learned in the mishna that one may not place it means that it is prohibited to leave it; in that case, the mishna is teaching as follows: With regard to a stove that was lit with straw or with rakings, one may leave cooked food on it. If it was lit with pomace or with wood, one may not leave the cooked food on it until he sweeps the coals out while it is still day or until he places ashes on it. And what may they leave? Beit Shammai say: Hot water but not cooked food. And Beit Hillel say: One may leave both hot water and cooked food on it. And just as they disagree with regard to leaving a pot on the stove, so too, they disagree with regard to whether or not it is permitted to return it to the stove. As Beit Shammai say: One may take the pot from the stove on Shabbat but may not return it to the stove at all. And Beit Hillel say: One may even return it.

אלא אי אמרת להחזיר תנן הכי קתני כירה שהסיקוה בקש ובגבבא מחזירין עליה תבשיל בגפת ובעצים לא יחזיר עד שיגרוף או עד שיתן אפר ומה הן מחזירין בית שמאי אומרים חמין אבל לא תבשיל ובית הלל אומרים חמין ותבשיל בית שמאי אומרים נוטלין אבל לא מחזירין ובית הלל אומרים אף מחזירין הא תו למה לי

However, if you say that when we learned in the mishna that one may not place, it means that it is prohibited to return it, then the mishna is teaching as follows: A stove that was lit with straw or with rakings, one may return cooked food onto it. If it was lit with pomace or with wood, one may not return cooked food to it until one sweeps the coals out while it is still day or until one places ashes on them. And what may they return? Beit Shammai say: Hot water but not cooked food. And Beit Hillel say: Both hot water and cooked food. Beit Shammai say: One may remove but may not return. And Beit Hillel say: One may even return. If in the first section the question of what may be returned was already addressed, why do I need this additional dispute in the second section? The gist of Beit Shammai’s statement that cooked food may not be returned to the stove is that one may remove but may not return. Apparently, the mishna can only be understood in accordance with the first explanation. The first clause discusses leaving and the latter clause discusses returning.