I was sitting in a class about blogging and I don't quite remember what it was she said that sparked this, but I thought, wouldn't a blog be a great place to share our thoughts on what we're learning, or whatever else we're looking into to bolster our understanding of the path of Halakha and where the Shulkhan Arukh et. al. fits in.
Gemara Shabbat, Perek Sh'lishi (the 3rd Chapter) Daf Lamed-vav amud bet (page 36, side B) to Daf Lamed-zayin amud aleph (page 37, side A):
The Mishna begins by saying "a Kira that is heated with kash (straw) [according to Rashi, this is the "tails" of the bundles of grain] or g'vava (stubble) [fast burning fuels] you can put a tavshil on, if it's heated with gefet (according to Rashi, this is refuse from making oil) or wood [slow burning fuels] you may not put a tavshil on unless you have scraped it out or covered it with ask. Beit Shamai says hamin but not a tavshil, Beit Hillel says hamin and tavshil -- Beit Shamai says hamin you can put it on but not return it, Beit Hillel says you can ever return it." (according to Rashi, the difference between hamin and tavshil is that hamin is fully cooked and tavshil still needs cooking. [We have since learned that another opinion states that hamin is boiled water and tavshil is a cooked food.]
The Gemara starts by trying to figure out what the makhloket (halakhic argument) is about. First off, the Gemara talks about a breita (a piece of mishnaic literature not included in the mishna) that says "Rabbi Hanania says that if a food is at the level of Ben Drusai (either 1/3 or 1/2 cooked, depending on the source) you can leave it on a kira even if it hasn't been scraped out or covered with ash."
The Gemara then says there are two ways to understand the mishna as far as whether you can leave a pot on a kira on Shabbat:
1) You can leave it even if it is not scraped or covered with ash
2) If it is scraped or covered with ash you can leave it buy if it is not scraped or covered with ash you are not permitted to leave it.
There was then a discussion about a makhloket between Beit Shamai and Beit Hillel. This is a chart showing the two ways to understand the makhloket:
| Tanna Kama | Beit Shamai | Beit Hillel | |
| For fast burning or | aleph Sh’hia | ||
| Slow burning that | yes | yes | hamin |
| has been scraped | no | yes | tavshil |
| or covered with ash | bet hahzara | ||
| notlim | notlim | hamin | |
| lo mahzirin | mahzirin | tavshil |
The Gemara then wants to show how the makhloket can be interpreted as being about hahzara (returning the pot -- see section bet on the chart rather than sh’hia (leaving the pot on -- see section aleph on the chart). The Gemara says that Rav Helbo in the name of his teacher, Rav Hama Bar Guria in the name of his teacher, Rav that we are speaking here of "on top" but all is assur (prohibited) when speaking about the inside. The Gemara wonder why we should care whether it's on top or inside, since they are both allowed [when talking about sh’hia] then they bring a tosephta (another type of mishnaic literature often mentioned in the Gemara). There is a makhloket between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda. If you have to kirot side by side where one is garuf (scraped) or katum (covered with ash) -- see picture below -- everyone agrees that you can't leave anything or return anything to the kira that isn't garuf or katum, the makhloket is about the left side kira.
According to Rabbi Meir, Beit Shamai and Beit Hillel both agree that you can't return anything. According to Rabbi Yehuda:
| Beit Shamai | Beit Hillel |
| Sh’hia | |
| Nothing | hamin but not tavshil |
| hamin but not tavshil | hamin and tavshil |
| notlim but not mahzirin | notlim and mahzirin |
Check out another blog:
Israel and it's Place in the World
(to the members of the HP/Edison Pirchei Shoshanim Habura/Hevra -- Please add comments, corrections, other sources. I want this to be a place where we all can share our ideas and other sources for and from our learning.)
No comments:
Post a Comment