## Shabbat Daf 37a

###### Shabbat 37a:1
[Shabbat 37a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/37a:1)

לְעוֹלָם אֵימָא לָךְ לְהַחֲזִיר תְּנַן, וְחַסּוֹרֵי מִיחַסְּרָא וְהָכִי קָתָנֵי: כִּירָה שֶׁהִסִּיקוּהָ בְּקַשׁ וּבִגְבָבָא — מַחֲזִירִין עָלֶיהָ תַּבְשִׁיל, בְּגֶפֶת וּבְעֵצִים — לֹא יַחֲזִיר עַד שֶׁיִּגְרוֹף אוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּתֵּן אֶת הָאֵפֶר. אֲבָל לְשַׁהוֹת — מְשַׁהִין אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ גָּרוּף וְאֵינוֹ קָטוּם. וּמָה הֵן מְשַׁהִין? — בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: חַמִּין, אֲבָל לֹא תַּבְשִׁיל. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: חַמִּין וְתַבְשִׁיל. וְהָךְ חֲזָרָה דַּאֲמַרִי לָךְ, לָאו דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל הִיא, אֶלָּא מַחֲלוֹקֶת בֵּית שַׁמַּאי וּבֵית הִלֵּל, שֶׁבֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: נוֹטְלִין וְלֹא מַחֲזִירִין. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: אַף מַחֲזִירִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this proof. **Actually, you can say** that in the first clause of the mishna **we learned to return and** the mishna is **incomplete.** A clause must be added to the mishna, **and it teaches the following:** With regard to **a stove that was lit with straw** or **rakings, one may return** a pot of **cooked food to it.** If it was lit **with pomace** or **with wood, one may not return** a pot to it **until one sweeps** the coals out while it is still day **or until one covers** the coals **with ashes. However, to leave** the pot on the flame on Shabbat, **one may leave it, even though it is not swept and not covered with ashes.** Through this addition, the continuation of the dispute can be understood as follows: **And what may they leave? Beit Shammai say: Hot water but not cooked food. And Beit Hillel say:** Both **hot water and cooked food.** Furthermore: **And that return that I said to you** at the start of the mishna **is not according to everyone. Rather,** it too **is** subject to **a dispute** between **Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel, as Beit Shammai say: One may remove but not return. And Beit Hillel say: One may even return.** The dilemma with regard to the interpretation of the mishna has not been resolved.


###### Shabbat 37a:2
[Shabbat 37a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/37a:2)

תָּא שְׁמַע, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי חֶלְבּוֹ אָמַר רַב חָמָא בַּר גּוּרְיָא אָמַר רַב: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא עַל גַּבָּהּ, אֲבָל לְתוֹכָהּ — אָסוּר. אִי אָמְרַתְּ בִּשְׁלָמָא ״לְהַחֲזִיר״ תְּנַן — הַיְינוּ דְּשָׁנֵי בֵּין תּוֹכָהּ לְעַל גַּבָּהּ. אֶלָּא אִי אָמְרַתְּ ״לְשַׁהוֹת״ תְּנַן, מַה לִּי תּוֹכָהּ מַה לִּי עַל גַּבָּהּ? — מִי סָבְרַתְּ רַבִּי חֶלְבּוֹ אַרֵישָׁא קָאֵי? אַסֵּיפָא קָאֵי: ״וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים אַף מַחֲזִירִין״ — וְאָמַר רַבִּי חֶלְבּוֹ אָמַר רַב חָמָא בַּר גּוּרְיָא אָמַר רַב: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא עַל גַּבָּהּ, אֲבָל תּוֹכָהּ — אָסוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Come** and **hear** another resolution to this dilemma from that which **Rabbi Ḥelbo said** that **Rav Ḥama bar Gurya said** that **Rav said: They only taught** that placing is permitted with regard to a stove as far as placing a pot **atop it** is concerned. **However,** placing a pot **inside it** is **prohibited. Granted, if you say** that **we learned returning** in the mishna, **that is why there is a** halakhic **difference between** placing a pot **inside it and** placing a pot **atop it.** If one returns it on Shabbat, placing it inside a stove that might have burning coals, there is concern that Shabbat would be desecrated. Therefore, it was only permitted to place cooked food atop the stove. **However, if you say** that **we learned leaving** in the mishna, **what is** the difference **to me** whether it is **inside** the stove and **what is** the difference **to me** whether it is **atop it?** Ultimately, he does nothing on Shabbat with the hot ashes in the stove. The Gemara rejects this proof: **Do you think** that **Rabbi Ḥelbo is referring to the first clause** of the mishna? No, he **is referring to the latter clause** of the mishna, which states: **And Beit Hillel say that one may even return. And** with regard to this **Rabbi Ḥelbo said** that **Rav Ḥama bar Gurya said** that **Rav said: They only taught** that one may return the cooked food **atop** the stove; **however, inside it** is **prohibited.** If so, there is still no resolution to the dilemma.


###### Shabbat 37a:3
[Shabbat 37a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/37a:3)

תָּא שְׁמַע: שְׁתֵּי כִּירוֹת הַמַּתְאִימוֹת, אַחַת גְּרוּפָה וּקְטוּמָה, וְאַחַת שֶׁאֵינָהּ גְּרוּפָה וְאֵינָהּ קְטוּמָה: מְשַׁהִין עַל גַּבֵּי גְּרוּפָה וּקְטוּמָה וְאֵין מְשַׁהִין עַל שֶׁאֵינָהּ גְּרוּפָה וְאֵינָהּ קְטוּמָה. וּמָה הֵן מְשַׁהִין? — בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: וְלֹא כְלוּם. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: חַמִּין, אֲבָל לֹא תַּבְשִׁיל. עָקַר — דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל לֹא יַחֲזִיר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר — בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: חַמִּין, אֲבָל לֹא תַּבְשִׁיל. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: חַמִּין וְתַבְשִׁיל. בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: נוֹטְלִין, אֲבָל לֹא מַחֲזִירִין. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: אַף מַחֲזִירִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Come** and **hear** a resolution to this dilemma from that which was taught in the *Tosefta*: In the case of **two adjoining stoves** that share a common wall, in **one** of them, the coals were **swept** or **covered with ashes, and** in **one** the coals **were not swept and not covered with ashes;** the ruling with regard to leaving a pot atop them on Shabbat is as follows: **One may leave** food **atop** the one that was **swept** or **covered with ashes, and one may not leave** food **atop the** one **that was not swept and not covered with ashes. And** to the crux of the matter, **what may one leave? Beit Shammai say: Nothing at all.** They dispute the *halakha* cited above. **And Beit Hillel say:** One may leave **hot water but not cooked food.** However, if one **removed** the cooked dish from atop the stove, **everyone,** Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel, **agrees** that **one may not return** it atop the stove; this is **the statement of Rabbi Meir.** According to the tradition that he received, that is the issue disputed between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel. **Rabbi Yehuda says** that the dispute is different. **Beit Shammai say:** One may leave **hot water** on it **but not cooked food. And Beit Hillel say:** One may leave both **hot water and cooked food.** Furthermore, **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.


###### Shabbat 37a:4
[Shabbat 37a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/37a:4)

אִי אָמְרַתְּ בִּשְׁלָמָא ״לְשַׁהוֹת״ תְּנַן, מַתְנִיתִין מַנִּי — רַבִּי יְהוּדָה הִיא. אֶלָּא אִי אָמְרַתְּ ״לְהַחֲזִיר״ תְּנַן, מַתְנִיתִין מַנִּי? לָא רַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְלָא רַבִּי מֵאִיר. אִי רַבִּי מֵאִיר — קַשְׁיָא לְבֵית שַׁמַּאי בַּחֲדָא, וּלְבֵית הִלֵּל בְּתַרְתֵּי. אִי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, קַשְׁיָא גְּרוּפָה וּקְטוּמָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Granted, if you say** that the case **we learned** in our mishna was with regard to **leaving** the pot on the stove, in accordance with **whose** opinion is **our mishna? It is** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda. However, if you say** that the case **we learned** in our mishna was with regard to **returning** the pot to the stove, in accordance with **whose** opinion is **our mishna?** It is **neither** in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda nor** with the opinion of **Rabbi Meir. If** you say that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Meir,** it is **difficult for Beit Shammai in one** respect. In our mishna, Beit Shammai permit some use of a stove on Shabbat; while according to Rabbi Meir in the *baraita*, Beit Shammai prohibit any use. **And for Beit Hillel** it is difficult **in two** respects. According to our understanding of the mishna, Beit Hillel permit both hot water and cooked food, contrary to Rabbi Meir’s version of their opinion as stated in the *baraita*. Similarly, in our mishna, Beit Hillel permit returning the pot to the stove, contrary to Rabbi Meir’s version of their opinion. **If** you explain that our mishna is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda** in the *baraita*, it is **difficult** with regard to the issue of **sweeping** the coals **and covering** them **with ashes.** In the mishna, both Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai allow leaving it on a stove whose coals were not swept or covered with ashes. According to Rabbi Yehuda in the *baraita*, apparently a stove whose coals are neither swept nor covered with ashes may not be used at all. Since this interpretation leads to contradictions, it is preferable to explain the mishna in accordance with the other approach, so that the mishna will at least correspond to one opinion.


###### Shabbat 37a:5
[Shabbat 37a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/37a:5)

לְעוֹלָם אֵימָא לָךְ ״לְהַחֲזִיר״ תְּנַן, וְתַנָּא דִידַן סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה בַּחֲדָא וּפְלִיג עֲלֵיהּ בַּחֲדָא. סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה בַּחֲדָא — בְּחַמִּין וְתַבְשִׁיל, וְנוֹטְלִין וּמַחְזִירִין. וּפְלִיג עֲלֵיהּ בַּחֲדָא — דְּאִילּוּ תַּנָּא דִידַן סָבַר לְשַׁהוֹת וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ גָּרוּף וְקָטוּם, וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה סָבַר בִּלְשַׁהוֹת נָמֵי גָּרוּף וְקָטוּם — אִין, אִי לָא — לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
This claim is rejected: **Actually, you can say** that the case **we learned** in our mishna was with regard to **returning** the pot to the stove, **and our *tanna*** in the mishna **holds in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda in one** matter, **and disagrees with him in one** matter. **He holds in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda in one** matter, with regard to the matter of **hot water and cooked food, and** what may be **taken** from the stove **and** what may even be **returned. And** he **disagrees with him in one** matter: **While our *tanna*** in the mishna **held** that **to leave** a pot on a stove is permitted **even though it is not swept or covered with ashes, Rabbi Yehuda held: With regard to** permitting one **to leave** a pot on the stove **as well,** if the stove was **swept or covered with ashes, yes,** it is permitted; **if** it was **not** swept or covered with ashes, **no,** it is prohibited.


###### Shabbat 37a:6
[Shabbat 37a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/37a:6)

אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: מַהוּ לִסְמוֹךְ בָּהּ? תּוֹכָהּ וְגַבָּהּ אָסוּר, אֲבָל לִסְמוֹךְ בָּהּ — שַׁפִּיר דָּמֵי, אוֹ דִילְמָא לָא שְׁנָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**A dilemma was raised before** the Sages: With regard to a stove that was neither swept nor covered with ashes, **what is** the *halakha* with regard to permitting one **to lean** a cooked dish **against it,** so that it may be heated from the sides of the stove? The dilemma is: Was it only placing a pot **inside it and atop it** that **is prohibited,** but **to lean** the pot **against it** he may **well** do so? **Or, perhaps,** leaning **is no different** and it is prohibited in every case.


###### Shabbat 37a:7
[Shabbat 37a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/37a:7)

תָּא שְׁמַע: שְׁתֵּי כִּירוֹת הַמַּתְאִימוֹת, אַחַת גְּרוּפָה וּקְטוּמָה וְאַחַת שֶׁאֵינָהּ גְּרוּפָה וּקְטוּמָה, מְשַׁהִין עַל גַּבֵּי גְּרוּפָה וּקְטוּמָה. וְאַף עַל גַּב דְּקָא סָלֵיק לֵיהּ הַבְלָא מֵאִידָךְ! דִּילְמָא שָׁאנֵי הָתָם, דְּכֵיוָן דְּמִידַּלְּיָא שָׁלֵיט בָּהּ אַוֵּירָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Come** and **hear** a resolution to this dilemma from that which was taught in a *baraita*: If there are **two adjoining stoves, one** that was **swept** or **covered with ashes and one that was not swept and covered with ashes, one may leave** cooked food **atop** the stove that is **swept and covered with ashes** on Shabbat. Apparently, it is permitted to lean a pot on a stove that was not swept, **even though heat rises to it from the other** stove. The Gemara rejects this: **Perhaps that** case of two adjoining stoves **is different. Since** the pot **is elevated, the air affects it** and cools it. Therefore, it is not comparable to actually leaning it against the stove.


###### Shabbat 37a:8
[Shabbat 37a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/37a:8)

תָּא שְׁמַע, דְּאָמַר רַב סָפְרָא אָמַר רַב חִיָּיא: קְטָמָהּ וְנִתְלַבְּתָה, סוֹמְכִין לָהּ וּמְקַיְּימִין עָלֶיהָ, וְנוֹטְלִין מִמֶּנָּה וּמַחְזִירִין לָהּ. שְׁמַע מִינָּה לִסְמוֹךְ נָמֵי, קְטָמָהּ — אִין, לֹא קְטָמָהּ — לָא. וּלְטַעְמָיךְ, ״נוֹטְלִין מִמֶּנָּה״ דְּקָתָנֵי, קְטָמָהּ — אִין, לֹא קְטָמָהּ — לָא?! אֶלָּא תְּנָא נוֹטְלִין מִשּׁוּם מַחְזִירִין, הָכָא נָמֵי תְּנָא סוֹמְכִין מִשּׁוּם מְקַיְּימִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Come** and **hear** another resolution to this dilemma from that which **Rav Safra said** that **Rav Ḥiyya said:** If there is a stove whose coals **one covered** with ashes on Shabbat eve **and it** subsequently **reignited** on Shabbat, **one may lean** a pot **against it, and leave** cooked food **on it, and remove** food **from it, and** even **return** food **to it. Conclude from this** the following with regard to **leaning, as well:** If **he covered** them **with ashes, yes,** if **he did not cover** them **with ashes, no,** as the Gemara is speaking about a stove whose ashes were covered properly during the day. The Gemara rejects this proof too. **And according to your opinion, that which was taught: One may remove** the food **from it,** would you say there too that if **he covered them, yes,** and if **he did not cover them, no?** Everyone agrees that it is permitted to take the pot off of the stove even if it is not swept or covered with ashes. **Rather,** it must be understood that **he taught** permission **to remove** the pot **due to** the fact that it taught permission **to return** it. **Here too, it taught** permission **to lean** the pot **due to** the fact that it taught permission **to leave** the pot on the stove. Consequently, a conclusion cannot be drawn that leaning a pot on an unswept stove is prohibited.


###### Shabbat 37a:9
[Shabbat 37a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/37a:9)

הָכִי הַשְׁתָּא?! הָתָם נוֹטְלִין וּמַחְזִירִין בְּחַד מָקוֹם הוּא, תְּנָא נוֹטְלִין מִשּׁוּם מַחְזִירִין. אֶלָּא הָכָא — סוֹמְכִין בְּחַד מָקוֹם הוּא וּמְקַיְּימִין בְּחַד מָקוֹם הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara is astonished by this comparison. **How can you compare** them? **There, one removes** the pot from **and returns it** to **one** and the same **place.** Therefore, **it taught removing due to returning,** as one cannot return a pot before he removes it. **However, here,** where **one leans** the pot **is in one place and** where **one leaves** the pot **is in one,** another, **place,** there is no connection between the two. If the *tanna* did not intend to teach that leaning is permitted only on a swept stove, there would be no reason to mention permission to lean in conjunction with permission to leave. In any event, this is not an absolute proof, and the dilemma has not been resolved.


###### Shabbat 37a:10
[Shabbat 37a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/37a:10)

מַאי הָוֵי עֲלַהּ? תָּא שְׁמַע: כִּירָה שֶׁהִסִּיקוּהָ בְּגֶפֶת וּבְעֵצִים סוֹמְכִין לָהּ, וְאֵין מְקַיְּימִין אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן גְּרוּפָה וּקְטוּמָה. גֶּחָלִים שֶׁעָמְמוּ אוֹ שֶׁנָּתַן עָלֶיהָ נְעוֹרֶת שֶׁל פִּשְׁתָּן דַּקָּה — הֲרֵי הִיא כִּקְטוּמָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What conclusion was reached** with regard to this dilemma? **Come** and **hear** a resolution to this from that which was taught in the *Tosefta*: With regard to **a stove that was lit with pomace** or **with wood, one may lean** a pot of cooked food **against it; however, one may not leave** a pot inside it **unless** the stove is **swept out** or **covered with ashes. Coals that dimmed or on which a strip of** thinly **beaten flax was placed** and the fire did not ignite, **it is as** if it were **covered with ashes,** and one need not add more ashes to it. In any case, the conclusion is drawn from here that one is permitted to lean a dish of cooked food against a stove, even though it is not covered with ashes or swept out.


###### Shabbat 37a:11
[Shabbat 37a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Shabbat/r/37a:11)

אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר נַחְמָנִי אָמַר רַב אוֹשַׁעְיָא: קְטָמָהּ וְהוּבְעֲרָה מְשַׁהִין עָלֶיהָ חַמִּין שֶׁהוּחַמּוּ כׇּל צוֹרְכָּן וְתַבְשִׁיל שֶׁבִּישֵּׁל כׇּל צוֹרְכּוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Naḥmani said** that **Rav Oshaya said:** With regard to a stove that **he covered with ashes and** that **reignited** on Shabbat, **one may leave hot water that was** already **completely heated and cooked food that was** already **completely cooked upon it.** In that case, there is no need for additional cooking, and therefore there is no concern that one might come to stoke the coals and ignite the fire.