Shabbat 36b — the Talmud in English

What is the practical difference? -

For bills of divorce.

The Jews of Babylonia were expert in writing the get for the sake of the woman being divorced. Therefore, one who brings a get from Babylonia is not like one who brings a get from an overseas country, and he does not need to say, “In my presence it was written, and in my presence it was signed.” And now the names of the Jews of Babylonia have changed, and they are called the Jews of Bursif, whereas the Jews of Bursif are called the Jews of Babylonia; and they are among those who are not expert in writing the get. Therefore, one who brings a get from those who are currently called the Jews of Babylonia must say, “In my presence it was written, and in my presence it was signed”.

We shall return to you, chapter “With What Does One Kindle?”

Introduction to the Chapter “Stove”

The labor of cooking that is forbidden by Torah law is softening or hardening anything through the heat of fire, or making something fit for eating, such as cooking it, roasting it, or baking it, and the like.

The cooking forbidden by Torah law applies both to cooking in fire and to cooking through “derivatives of fire” [with something that became heated and absorbed the heat of fire, such as iron made white-hot in fire, which it is forbidden to place into water in order to cook it].

The degree of heat appropriate for cooking is: once the hand recoils from it.

Likewise, the Sages instituted several decrees concerning cooking. The first part of the chapter deals with these decrees:

A.

Insulation —

The Sages forbade insulating a cooked dish on the eve of Shabbat inside something that increases heat [warmth], lest one insulate it in embers [coals containing fire] and come to rake through them on Shabbat, something forbidden by Torah law.

The Sages further added and decreed that on Shabbat itself a person may not insulate a pot even in something that does not increase heat, but only preserves the heat of the pot, out of concern that he might see that the pot is not hot enough and come to bring it to a boil on the fire, which is something forbidden by Torah law.

B.

Leaving —

The Sages forbade leaving a cooked dish on an uncovered fire on Shabbat, lest one rake through the coals in order to intensify the heat of the fire. Therefore, one must remove the coals from the oven, or spread ash over them, so that he will have a sign and will not stumble by raking through the coals.

C.

Returning —

A cooked dish that was removed from the stove on the eve of Shabbat, the Sages forbade returning it to the stove on Shabbat, even though it is completely cooked, because it appears as though he is cooking on Shabbat. Likewise, a cooked dish that was removed from the stove on Shabbat itself may not be returned to the stove, unless the conditions explained below are fulfilled [38b].

There are three types of utensils in which people customarily cooked, and concerning them the Sages instituted their decrees:

A.

Stove —

A utensil made of earthenware, shaped like a pot, broad above and narrow below, with a place on it [and inside it] for resting two pots, while the fire is below, underneath the pots.

B.

Small stove —

A utensil whose shape is like that of a stove, except that it has a place for resting one pot, and consequently its heat is greater than that of a stove.

C.

Oven —

A utensil broad below and narrow above, whose heat is greater than that of a stove and a small stove. The first Mishna deals with the laws of a stove, and the Mishna after it with the laws of a small stove and an oven.

There are three stages in preparing a cooked dish:

A. The beginning of cooking, until “one-third of its cooking.”

B. The continuation of cooking, from “cooked one-third” [called “cooked as the food of Ben Drusai”] until complete cooking.

C. “Completely cooked,” which continues to cook in two ways. One is when it improves, called “diminishing and improving for him,” and the second is “completely cooked” whose continued cooking damages it, called “diminishing and worsening for him.”

Mishna:

A.

A stove,

made of earthenware, in the shape of a pot, which is narrow at its bottom and broad above, with a place in it for placing two pots upon it or inside it, while the fire is beneath the pots,

which they heated with straw,

the ends of the stalks,

and with stubble,

thin pieces of wood like straw that are gathered in the field.

They place a cooked dish upon it

on the eve of Shabbat, in order to leave it upon it on Shabbat, because the straw and the stubble do not add heat to the stove, and the Sages did not fear that he might rake through the coals.

But if they heated it

with olive or sesame refuse

waste from olives or sesame]

and with wood,

which are things that cause the stove to become hot and increase heat, the Sages decreed that

he may not place

a cooked dish upon it, lest he rake through the coals. Therefore, it is forbidden to leave the cooked dish on the stove on Shabbat

until he removes the coals,

clears the coals outside the stove,

or until he places the ash,

and through this the stove will cool and will not produce heat. B. A stove from which the coals have been removed or over which ash has been placed:

Beit Shammai say,

it is permitted to leave hot water upon it,

but not a cooked dish.

And Beit Hillel say,

it is permitted to leave upon it

hot water and a cooked dish.

C.

Beit Shammai say,

even though it is permitted to leave hot water on the eve of Shabbat on a stove from which the coals have been removed or over which ash has been placed, on Shabbat itself one only

takes

the pot from the fire,

but does not return

the pot to the fire.

And Beit Hillel say, even

he may return it.

Gemara:

It was raised before them: this

that we say, “With refuse and with wood

he may not place

until he removes the coals or until he places the ash,” does its meaning consist of

“he may not return”?

That is, only returning the pot [from a stove from which the coals and ash have not been removed] is forbidden on Shabbat,

but leaving,

leaving the pot from the eve of Shabbat,

one may leave it even though it has not been cleared

of the coals

and ash has not been placed over it,

he did not place ash over the coals.

And from where

is this Mishna? —

It is Hanania's,

who permits leaving a pot on a stove that has not been raked out.

As it was taught: Hanania says: Every

food

that is

already cooked

like the food of ben Drusai — [named after a bandit called “ben Drusai,” who was satisfied with partial cooking] —

named after a bandit called Ben Drusai, who was satisfied with partially cooked food—

it is permitted to leave it

from the eve of Shabbat

on top of a stove, even though it has not been raked out and has not been

covered.

Or perhaps,

what we learned, “One may not place it until he rakes it out,” means that one may not even leave the stew on the fire from the eve of Shabbat. And according to this, our Mishna, concerning the question whether it is permitted

to leave, we learned, and

with regard to leaving the Mishna states,

if it is raked out and covered, yes,

it is permitted to leave a pot on the stove.

If not, no.

And all the more so

that it is forbidden

to return

it to a stove that has not been raked out and covered.

The Gemara brings proof from our Mishna:

Come and hear: Since it teaches two sections in the Mishna,

from the fact that the Mishna brought two matters in which Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel disagreed.

In the first section it says:

“Beit Shammai say: hot water but not a stew; and Beit Hillel say: hot water and a stew.”

And in the second section it says:

“Beit Shammai say: one may remove but may not return; and Beit Hillel say: one may also return.”

Thus, from here there is proof of the meaning of the Mishna:

For

if you say

that it is forbidden to leave on a stove that has not been raked out, like the Rabbis who disagree with Hanania, and that our Mishna is concerning the law of

“we learned leaving,”

then

this is what it teaches,

the Mishna is understood according to its simple meaning:

“A stove that they heated with straw and stubble: they may leave upon it

from the eve of Shabbat

a stew,

since there is no concern lest one stoke the coals produced from the burning of straw and stubble.

And if they heated it

with peat and wood, he may not leave

it on the stove

until he rakes it out or until he places ashes.”

And now the Gemara explains the two disagreements in which Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel disagreed regarding a stove that has been raked out and covered:

A. Regarding leaving.

And what may they leave

on a stove that has been raked out?

Beit Shammai say:

It is permitted to leave only

hot water, but not a stew. And Beit Hillel say: hot water and a stew.

B. Regarding returning.

And just as they disagree regarding leaving

they also disagree regarding returning.

And that is,

that Beit Shammai say: one may remove

it from the stove that has been raked out and covered,

but may not return it

to it.

And Beit Hillel say: one may also return it.

It follows that if we explain that the Mishna requires raking out and covering also for leaving [“we learned leaving”], then it is well explained that Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel disagreed regarding two different laws.

But if you say, “we learned returning,”

what is stated in the Mishna, “One may not place it until he rakes it out,” means that he may not return a pot on Shabbat to the stove until he rakes it out, but leaving on a stove that has not been raked out is permitted, like Hanania.

According to this, the law of leaving was not mentioned in the Mishna at all, and Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel did not disagree regarding it, but only regarding returning.

If so, it is difficult: How are the two disagreements of Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel in the Mishna to be understood? For the entire Mishna speaks only about returning, and necessarily

this is what it teaches:

“A stove that they heated with straw and stubble,

and placed a pot upon it from the eve of Shabbat,

they may return

it is permitted to return it

upon it

on Shabbat itself, both hot water and

a stew,

and all the more so they may place upon it from the eve of Shabbat a stew that will remain upon it on Shabbat.

And if they heated it

with peat and wood,

which are things that increase heat, the Sages decreed that if one removed the pot from the stove on Shabbat,

he may not return it

to the stove

until he rakes it out

the coals on the eve of Shabbat

or until he places ashes,

because he appears like one cooking. But leaving a stew upon it from the eve of Shabbat is permitted.

And regarding returning, Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel disagreed:

And what may they return

on top of the stove that has been raked out on Shabbat?

Beit Shammai say:

They may return

hot water but not a stew,

because returning a stew appears as though he came to cook on Shabbat, but when he returns hot water he does not appear to be cooking.

And Beit Hillel say:

They may return

hot water and a stew.

And again it is stated in the final section of the Mishna:

“Beit Shammai say: one may remove

from upon the stove on Shabbat,

but may not return; and Beit Hillel say: one may also return.”

And let it be challenged:

“This too—why do I need it?”

Why did the Mishna repeat and duplicate the disagreement regarding returning? Rather, it necessarily proves that the Mishna is “we learned leaving.”