B'siyata Dishmaya (with Heaven's help), we begin today our halachot (laws) of siman (section) shin-yod-chet, Masechet Shabbat. We have the Aruch HaShulchan as our starting point. If you open to shin-yod-chet in the Aruch HaShulchan, we need to cover a few sections here. I’m not going in order, because Maran, in Hilchot Bishul (Laws of Cooking), starts with a choleh (ill person) case and doesn’t start with the regular rules. So first we’ll go through the rules, be'ezrat Hashem. We’ll jump around, and eventually we’ll get every—There are 58, Noach, Eleh toldot Noach (These are the generations of Noah), 58 se'ifim (sections) in this. We’ll go through all 58. But anything nigmar u-me'uchar baTorah.
So we’ll start with alef. Bishul havei av melachah (primary labor). Bishul is one of the 39 melachot (prohibited labors). VeHayetah baMishkan (Tabernacle). Where did they cook in the Mishkan? Shebishlu hasemanim (they cooked the dyes). They cooked the dyes—the paint. Vehatanna beMishnah de'avot melachot chashiv ofeh (and the Tanna in the Mishnah counts baking among the primary labors). Even though, if you count the lamed-tet melachot, Bishul is not one of the 39; it says ofeh, baking. But baking and cooking are the same thing; they’re the same point. Why did it choose baking, then? How come the Mishnah, when it lists the 39 melachot, doesn’t say hamevashel? It says ha'ofeh.
So he says, venakat mevashel mishum sidra defat nakat, because the Mishnah is giving you the order of making bread, like Joe said: choresh (plowing), zore'a (sowing), kotzer (reaping), ve'omer (gathering), dash (threshing), zoreh (winnowing), borer (selecting), veroked (sifting), tochen (grinding), lash (kneading), ofeh. These are all the 11 processes to make bread. So, since we’re dealing with the making of bread, they used the lashon (wording) ofeh as opposed to mevashel. Klomar, mipnei shehitchil hazore'a, mesayem al lash veha'ofeh, ayen sham (that is, because it began with sowing and ended with kneading and baking; see there). Uvedina ein nafka minah (practical difference). There’s no difference between mevashel and ofeh. What’s the difference? Cooking and baking are the same thing.
Vetoldat mevashel hu afiyah (the derivative labor of cooking is baking). Right. Mevashel was what was done in the Mishkan. The toldah (derivative labor) of mevashel is afiyah (baking). So toldotehem kayotzei bahem (their derivatives are like them): the toldot are equal to the avot (primary labors).
Vehamvashel etzel toldat ha'or (derivative heat of fire), kegon shenoten beitzah betzad hamecham she'etzel ha'esh, bishvil shetitzleh betoldot ha'or, havei kimvashel be'or atzmah. There it is! A guy takes an egg and puts it next to the mecham. What’s the mecham? The urn—the water urn. The water urn is not on the fire. It’s not an electric urn; they didn’t have those in those days. It’s an urn that was heated on the fire. It’s not on the fire anymore, but it’s boiling hot. A guy took the egg and put it next to the urn.
That’s not called mevashel be'or; there’s no fire there. That’s called mevashel betoldat ha'or. What do you mean, toldat ha'or? How did this urn get hot? From a fire. That fire isn’t there anymore, but the fire is in the water; the heat is there. So the Aruch HaShulchan says that this is also culpable. Kegon shenoten beitzah betzad hamecham she'etzel ha'esh, bishvil shetitzleh betoldot ha'or, havei kimvashel be'or atzmah. Huh? That’s considered like cooking be'or atzmah. Okay, no problem. It sounds like cooking on the fire, or cooking betoldat ha'or, is the same thing.
Vechen hamatikh echad miminei matechot (and similarly, one who heats one of the metals). You take a piece of metal and put it in the fire to soften it so that you can bend it and do things like that, kol shehu (any amount), or you heat the metal until it becomes a gachelet (like a coal); harei zeh toldat mevashel vechayav (this is a derivative of cooking, and one is liable). Vechen hamemases et hadonag, like melting wax, o hachelev, or fats, o hazefet vehakofer vehagofrit—tar, sulfur—and similar substances; harei zeh toldat mevashel vechayav. So it’s not only food. Taking anything hard and using fire to soften it, or taking something soft and using fire to harden it, either way, is considered a toldah of mevashel.
Continue, rabotai (my teachers). Skip a little here, because he’s going to go through a couple of the Rambam’s sections. Go to chaf. The bottom line is that there’s no difference between mevashel and ofeh. Mevashel and ofeh are the same thing.
It sounded like, from the first part, ofeh is a toldah. That’s what—Yeah, because ofeh wasn’t in the Mishkan. They didn’t cook or bake anything in the Mishkan. Maybe they baked the lechem hapanim (showbread), but that’s not in the construction of the Mishkan; that’s in its operation. In the construction, which is what we’re learning about with the melachot, it was mevashel. What’s the difference? Mevashel, ofeh—it’s the same thing. In the lamed-tet melachot it says ofeh. No. Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, and that’s why he’s explaining why. Correct: because naktei sidra defat. Once you’re already in the sidra defat, from zore'a onward, they put—
“He’s calling Bishul an av, though.” “Well, Bishul is the av! That’s one of the 39.” “That is the av.” “Yeah, that is the av.” “That is the av! But calling it ofeh…” “They’re also calling it ofeh because of sidra defat, and ofeh is also asur min haTorah (prohibited by Torah law), just like mevashel.” So you’re calling it a toldah of Bishul; what’s the difference if you do it this way or that way?
Now go over here, to the halachah. He already gave us a rule about toldat ha'or. That’s what I want to talk about today: toldat ha'or. In the first halachah, he mentioned taking an egg and putting it—where is that from, by the way? Open your Masechet Shabbat. It’s actually a Mishnah in perek Kirah (Chapter Kirah), on daf (folio) lamed-chet. Let’s learn the sugya (Talmudic discussion) a little. No, no, no, we have the Gemara in front of us. What daf is it? I’ll tell you now. Here: lamed-chet amud bet. Let’s learn the Mishnah on lamed-chet amud bet. You see it at the bottom? The bottom Mishnah. Lamed-chet amud bet, got it? Lach. Rabbi David, do you need a book? We have Moshe, we have Moshe. David, do you have it there? Okay, David, you have it? You’ll listen to Torah shebe'al peh (Oral Torah).
Ein notnin beitzah betzad hamecham bishvil shetitgalgel. Stop right there. What does that mean? You cannot put an egg next to the mecham—that’s the urn. The urn isn’t on the fire; it’s an urn of hot water. Why are you putting the egg there? Kedei shetitgalgel (so that it will roll). To make it hard-boiled; you want to roll it. Titgalgel is basically to cook it. Rashi: shetitzleh ktzat, you want to roast it a little, ad shetehe megulgelet. I guess a raw egg doesn’t roll; it just spins. Fine.
Rashi: Ein notnin beitzah betzad hamecham, kumkumus shel nechoshet. The kumkum—the urn of nechoshet—is metal that has hot water in it. Velo yafki'enah bisudarin, veRabbi Yosei matir. I don’t know what yafki'enah bisudarin means; that’s another halachah. So basically, the Mishnah is telling you it’s asur (prohibited). Look at the Gemara now. Iba'ya lehu (they asked): galgel mai? What is galgel mai? You just told me it’s asur. Amar Rav Yosef: galgel chayav chatat (liable for a sin-offering).
Oh! So it sounds like the Gemara’s question is, “What’s the level of isur of gilgul?” Exactly: is it de'oraita (from the Torah) or derabbanan (rabbinically prohibited)? What’s the madregah (level) of the isur? Galgel mai? Do we have Rashi on that? No. But from the Gemara’s answer you understand the question. Amar Rav Yosef: galgel chayav chatat. Okay, galgel chayav chatat—which means you don’t think that only cooking in or is chayav. Here there’s no fire. In the Mishkan, how did they cook? They cooked with fire! They didn’t cook by putting the semanim next to an urn. They cooked with mamash (an actual) fire. Here, ma fi esh, this is toldat ha'esh or toldat ha'or.
“I don’t take it for granted that it’s automatically chayav chatat just because it’s hot.” Right, you got the same result. But we’re not only interested in results on Shabbat. We’re interested in the way it was done in the Mishkan. “They didn’t cook with toldah?” No, in the Mishkan they cooked with fire. We know that for sure; that’s a fact. Why would they cook with toldah? Maybe certain items… No, the only item that they cooked was the semanim. “Are toldot not the same?” The semanim: they took a bowl of water, a bucket of water, took these herbs, mixed them in there, made a tripod, put the fire underneath it, and cooked them. Like normal cooking. There’s no reason for them not.
An egg you could cook like this. You can put an egg next to the kumkum, and it cooks if it’s hot enough to cook it. So the Gemara wants to know: hey, gilgul mai? Because from the Mishnah I have no re'ayah (proof). I know it’s asur. Now, I know, rabotai, you don’t care. What’s the difference if it’s asur derabbanan? I’m not bringing a korban chatat (sin-offering) today. You’re right, but you need to know the level of the isur for safek de'oraita lechumra (Torah doubt is stringent) and all the snifim lahalachah (halachic considerations). You always have to know the madregah of the isur so that when you need to look for a kula (leniency)... If you know it’s de'oraita and you have a safek, safek de'oraita lechumra, you’re going to be stuck. If it’s derabbanan, you can say there are snifim.
Anyway, the Gemara says, amar Rav Yosef, gilgel chayav chatat. Amar Mar berei de-Ravina af anan nami tanina (we too have learned it). Oh, we have a re'ayah that it’s chayav chatat. What’s your re'ayah? Kol sheba bachamin milifnei haShabbat, which means something that, let’s say, was cooked before Shabbat: it came into hot water already me'erev Shabbat (on the eve of Shabbat), which means it was cooked before Shabbat. Shorin oto bachamin beShabbat (one may soak it in hot water on Shabbat), because it’s already cooked. Ein bishul achar bishul—it’s cooked already.
Vechol shelo ba bachamin milifnei haShabbat (and anything that did not come into hot water before Shabbat), but if it didn’t come bachamin before Shabbat, medichin oto bachamin beShabbat (one may rinse it with hot water on Shabbat). Oh, so medichin oto bachamin beShabbat, chutz min hamaliach yashan vekulyas ha'ispannin shehadachatan zo hi gemar melachtan (except for an old salted fish and kulyas ha'ispannin, for which rinsing completes the labor). Shema mina. So what does it say here? Certain things you can be mediach (rinse) on Shabbat. Mediach isn’t really cooking it. It’s putting it in hot water, let’s say—pouring hot water over it. It’s maybe not shorin, soaking it. But there are certain things for which even being mediach it is gemar melachah (completion of the labor).
Now, what is soaking it in water? The water has no fire in it. The water is only hot. It’s hot! It says clearly that there are certain items—chutz mimaliach yashan, whatever that is, a type of fish, vekulyas ha'ispannin, shehadachatan zo hi gemar melachtan. So you’re being mediach something, and the Gemara calls it gemar melachtan. Gemar melachtan sounds like gemar melachah. If it’s a gemar melachah, it sounds like it’s chayav chatat. So you see, to be chayav chatat you don’t need fire. Even in a case where there’s a hadachah, or a type of hot water that you’re cooking something with, bediyuk, bediyuk, that’s already considered—We know it’s asur. Nobody debates that it’s asur here. Our discussion is chiyuv chatat min haTorah or isur derabbanan. From the Gemara it sounds like chiyuv chatat, because gemar melachtan sounds like gemar melachah, and melachah sounds like a melachah de'oraita.
How did I get to learning like that? If I’m not mistaken, rabotai, open the Rif. Let me see if I can find it here, if we have it in our Gemarot. Yes, open the Ran on the Rif. So, perek Kirah—what is that, the third perek? What daf was this, lamed-chet? Let’s find it. The Ran is going to learn exactly as I taught you this Gemara. So perek Kirah—find it on daf yud-chet? Yes, very good, Joe. Ein notnin beitzah—chazak uvaruch. Look at the Ran. You see the Ran, iba'ya lehu? Do you have page yud-chet in the dapei haRif? “Come on, Yitzchak.” “I have no Rif in that.” Hold on. Maybe there is no Rif in that one. Oh, they give you this as a—here’s your money back. Okay, you got it for me, though.
So, you see the Ran, boys? Iba'ya lehu. Shlomo, do you have it? All right, bechavod (with respect), iba'ya lehu. ...hu. Galgal mai, betoldat ha'or bemecham miba'ya lan, miba'ya lan, i ika chiyuv chatat o lav? Beautiful! That’s the question, exactly as we learned the Gemara: i ika chiyuv chatat o lav (whether there is liability for a sin-offering or not). Umaskinan… Galgal chayav chatat. Chazak uvaruch!
How is maskinan? What’s the maskinan? Chutz mimliach hayashan vekulyas ha'ispannin. Medidin hi dekatani beperek chavit, vehachi katani, kol shelo ba bachamin me'erev Shabbat, kelomar, shelo nitbashel, medichin oto bachamin beShabbat, she'ein zeh gemar melachto. Aval lo shorin chutz… lo shorin chutz midag maliach hayashan o kulyas ha'ispannin, dag shekor'im tonina. Tuna. Basically, it’s telling you that for certain items, whatever hadachah is, hot water doesn’t cook them. However, for certain items, hadachah does cook them. But again, the hadachah is with hot water; it’s not fire.
So look at this re'ayah: shehadachatan zo hi… midekari lei gemar melachtan, shema minah zehu bishulo vechayav (since it calls it the completion of its labor, we learn that this is its cooking and one is liable). That’s the re'ayah, like we learned. The Gemara says that for certain things, hadachatan zo hi gemar melachtan. The Ran understood from that lashon (wording), gemar melachtan, that this is a chiyuv chatat. Good. So it’s clear from the Bavli that there’s no difference between or, the fire itself, and a toldah of the or.
“Good, but where’s the fire?” I understand, but the first thing we were talking about is putting the egg next to the fire. “Next to the water.” No, no, next to the urn. “Right, he’s not touching the water; he’s not touching the fire.” I’m not worried that the water is the isur; the heat is the issue. “Heat, that’s—” What’s the toldah de'or? The toldah de'or is the item that received the or. Here, it’s the urn with the kumkum. In the other case, it’s the water itself. I’m not interested in the water; I’m interested in the heat. So then, mah nafshach (either way), whether I’m putting the water on it or putting it next to an urn that got the heat, either way, it’s cooking it betoldat ha'or, and the Gemara says chiyuv chatat. Beautiful.
However, there’s a Yerushalmi (Jerusalem Talmud) here. That’s the Yerushalmi I sent you in your WhatsApp. Look at the Yerushalmi, the famous Yerushalmi. Tell me when you get it, boys, and we’ll start learning it. It’s two pages. It’s halachah dalet (the fourth law); it starts at the bottom, in perek Kirah. All the way at the bottom. Which page? It starts with mah bein keli rishon mah bein keli sheni. We have our own chat over, I think, no? Send them the other way. So the Gemara says here, Yerushalmi: mah bein keli rishon mah bein keli sheni. Simple question: what’s the difference between keli rishon (first vessel) and keli sheni (second vessel)?
The Gemara says, kan hayad sholetet vechan ein hayad sholetet (here the hand can control it, and here it cannot). I don’t know what this word means yet, but it’s telling me one of the items is called yad sholetet, and the other is ein hayad sholetet. I know yad soledet: we learned it means your hand gets burned and you have to pull it away. Maybe it’s the same thing, but the Yerushalmi is giving me new terminology. Instead of saying what we always call yad soledet, ein hayad soledet, the Yerushalmi says kan hayad sholetet vechan ein hayad sholetet.
So it’s making a chilluk (distinction). Look at the Penei Moshe. You see Penei Moshe? He’s one of the commentators on the Yerushalmi; I copied it for you; it’s on the side. Hayad sholetet, kelomar, ha dehittiru bekli sheni, mipenei shehayad sholetet bo. Right? Mamash, sholetet means sholetet: the hand can control it, the hand can tolerate it, ve'einah nichveit, uvikhli rishon ein hayad sholetet. So, because with a keli rishon, ein hayad sholetet, the hand can’t master it; hands are going to get burned. If a keli rishon is problematic but a keli sheni isn’t, why? Ki hayad sholetet: the hand can control it.
Basically, according to the Penei Moshe, sholetet is like soledet. Same thing. So when the Gemara says kan hayad soledet ve-khan ein hayad soledet, the Yerushalmi is just using the word sholetet: here the hand can tolerate it, and here the hand cannot tolerate it. Good.
Amar Rebbi Yonah, continue the Yerushalmi: kan ve-khan ein hayad sholetet. Oh! Mah zeh ein hayad sholetet? Both are considered ein hayad sholetet. Look at the Penei Moshe: amar Rebbi Yonah dela hi, ela kan ve-khan ein hayad sholetet. So if it’s ein hayad sholetet, why is a keli sheni okay, then?
U-khelomar ha de-hitiyru bi-khli sheni afilu hu rote'ach kol kach she-ein hayad sholetet bo, hainu ta'ama she-hitiyru deshe'ikar ha-davar eino ela mishum harchek she-lo yavo'u levashel al gabei ha-ur. Ve-hilkach bi-khli rishon asu harchek she-lo yavo litein le-tokho be'odo al gabei ha-ur, aval bi-khli sheni lo asu harchek de-khulei hai lo gazru. Rabotai, do you hear what happened here? It’s derabbanan. He says, amar Rebbi Yonah, I’m reading the Yerushalmi now: kan ve-khan ein hayad sholetet. Penei Moshe is learning, mah zeh ein hayad sholetet? It’s hot. Ein hayad sholetet—both keli rishon and keli sheni. So why is keli sheni okay and keli rishon problematic? The leshon Yerushalmi is that they made a harchek for keli rishon and not for keli sheni.
Bediyuk, for keli rishon they made a harchek, a gezeirah (rabbinic decree). What’s the gezeirah? With a keli rishon, you might come to do the de'oraita. What’s the de'oraita? On the fire. So they prohibited even a hot keli rishon that’s off the fire. With keli sheni, it’s already a second vessel, so it’s removed. Even though it’s hot, lo gazru, lo asu harchek (they did not decree a protective restriction). But it sounds like, according to the Yerushalmi—at least the way you’re learning the Penei Moshe—that a keli rishon off the fire is asurah, at least according to Rebbi Yonah, mishum harchek. It’s derabbanan.
So it comes out that we have a phenomenal machloket (dispute) between the Bavli and Yerushalmi on the extent of toldat ha'or. That’s a big machloket, Bavli and Yerushalmi. Now, that’s one way to learn the Yerushalmi. There’s another way to learn the Yerushalmi; that’s the way we learned from the Penei Moshe.
The Rashal—the Rashal isn’t by us; the Rashal is in Yoreh De'ah. The Rashal learns like this: ein hayad sholetet, kelomar ein hayad soledet, like we learned. Sholetet and soledet are the same. But it’s the opposite. “You’re right.” Ein hayad sholetet means hayad soledet. Bediyuk, ein hayad sholetet means the hand cannot tolerate it; that means it’s very, very hot. So he learns as the Penei Moshe learned. Beautiful. And therefore, according to the Yerushalmi, keli rishon is ein hayad sholetet, meaning it’s very, very hot. So why is it asur? The language of the Yerushalmi is asu harchek. The Penei Moshe explained the harchek: you might come to actually use it on the fire, because the keli rishon is so hot.
So they all ask on this way of learning the Yerushalmi: madua anu tzrichim le-harchakah va-halo mi-dina mevashel she-ein bo chom shehayad soledet bo? They ask: why do we need a protective restriction? If it’s a keli rishon that’s hayad soledet bo, lich'orah, we just learned from the Bavli that it’s an isur de'oraita, like the Gemara’s question, “Gilgel mai?” Chayav chatat! Kulyas ha'ispannin, hadachatan zo hi gemar melachtan! So now you’re telling me harchek?
U-Pri Chadash peireish she-ha-Yerushalmi sevira leih de-chiyuv bishul min ha-Torah hu davka ke-she-ha'ur mehalech tachtav ve-khol she-ein ha'ur mehalech tachtav eino mevashel min ha-Torah, ela asur mi-derabbanan ve-lo hutzrach ha-Yerushalmi le'esor mi-din harchakah bilvad, she… shekeivan she'eino al gabei ha'esh, eino mevashel mide'oraita. So according to this, the Pri Chadash is clearly learning a machloket between the Bavli and Yerushalmi. So ee hachi nami, you have a very, very good question. Your question is based on: “Hey, we learned in the Bavli.” That’s the Yerushalmi, Bavli, Yerushalmi. We have machlokot between the Bavli and Yerushalmi all day long. So the Pri Chadash says ee hachi nami. That’s why the Gemara says over there it’s a harchakah.
There’s only one problem, rabotai: if that’s the pshat (meaning) in the Yerushalmi, how could the Yerushalmi argue on a Mishnah? The Bavli brought a re'ayah from a Mishnah. What was the re'ayah? Kulyas ha'ispannin, this fish here: hadachatan, pouring hot water on it, zo hi gemar melachtan. Gemar melachtan, as they explained to us, means gemar melachtan. Now, that’s toldat ha'or. So the Yerushalmi is going to have to explain that Mishnah somehow. The Yerushalmi can’t argue on a Mishnah. It can have its own opinion, but it has to reconcile all the Mishnayot.
The Bavli, chevreh (friends), brought a solid re'ayah from that Mishnah. Remember the Bavli, rabotai? So the question is, how is the Yerushalmi going to answer that? Again, I don’t have a plan for how to argue it. He has a chidush (novel insight) here. “Gemar melachtan—it was the Gemara, though.” It’s a Mishnah. It’s a Mishnah. Af anan nami tanina, af anan nami tanina—it’s a Mishnah! The Yerushalmi can’t argue on a Mishnah.
One way to reconcile the Yerushalmi’s position raises a question, and I think we discussed this; we’ll discuss it now in shin-yod-chet. Is there makeh bepatish be'ochlin? Makeh bepatish is adding final touches. We know makeh bepatish was like by boneh, all that, or by any other melachot: when you’re doing the last blow, when it’s not the ikar melachah, when you’re doing something that finishes the item, that’s called makeh bepatish, adding final touches.
So there’s a big question: is there makeh bepatish by food? The Bi'ur Halachah here, in shin-yod-chet se'if dalet, on hadachatan, says that regarding kulyas ha'ispannin, where you’re pouring water on the kulyas ha'ispannin, the Pri Megadim brings down that the chiyuv is mishum makeh bepatish. Ulefi zeh asur lehadi'ach kulyas ha'ispannin af betzonen, has nothing to do with hot water! Even if you did it betzonen, im metakno bechach la'achilah, it’s mishum makeh bepatish. It’s a new item; it’s makeh bepatish, because, bottom line, putting cold water on this type of fish makes it edible.
However, they rejected that. Why? Look at our Gemara. When our Gemara says zo hi gemar melachtan, what does Rashi say on daf lamed-tet? Read Rashi, Shlomo. Hadachatan, zo hi gemar melachtan. Fourth line in Rashi. Udekari lah gemar melachta, shema minah, zehu bishulo! Ah, so Rashi clearly holds it’s Bishul. The Pri Megadim says, “Ah, it’s makeh bepatish.” So according to this, it could be that that’s the machloket between the Yerushalmi and Bavli. Is there makeh bepatish be'ochlin? Therefore, the Bavli and Yerushalmi have two different machlokot here, two machlokot on the fire.
The first machloket is legabei toldat ha'or. The Bavli holds it’s de'oraita, and the Bavli learns that from the re'ayah of hadachatan zo hi gemar melachtan, which is Bishul. However, the Yerushalmi is learning that it’s because of a harchakah. If it’s a harchakah, what do they do with that Mishnah? They’ll learn hadachatan zo hi gemar melachtan as makeh bepatish. True, it’s a different melachah, so we have no re'ayah from that. So it comes out that you have a double machloket between the Bavli and Yerushalmi. That’s how we would resolve it.
So he explains it like this: dehaBavli peireish divrei hamishnah shehadachatan zo hi gemar melachtan dehainu mishum gemar melechet bishul, achen Yerushalmi peireish divrei hamishnah shehadachatan zo hi gemar melachtan kiphshuto, shechiyuvo mishum gemar hamelachah. What is it, gemar melachtan? Hadachatan zo hi gemar melachtan. Just say hadachatan zo hi, zo hi bishulan. Zo hi bishulan. Zo hi melachtan. What does the Mishnah mean by saying zo hi gemar melachtan? Gemar melachtan is a makeh bepatish term, which means you finished the labor. Usually, that’s the makeh bepatish item. The Yerushalmi wasn’t comfortable learning those words as referring to Bishul, and it happened to work leshittatam (according to their position).
“So why would the Gemara in the Bavli bring that as a…?” “It’s a machloket.” “That’s the machloket, then?” “Oh, that is gufa demachloket. It’s a twofold machloket.” You understand? He says, ve'omnam gam leYerushalmi desavira sheyeish makeh bepatish be'ochlin… Oh, so then wait: makeh bepatish be'ochlin? When do you have Bishul, then? What’s Bishul, and what’s makeh bepatish?
Clearly, the Yerushalmi agrees that there is a mevashel in the lamed-tet melachot. But if you tell me that every time I finish something to make it edible, it’s makeh bepatish, then when do you have mevashel? “In the fire, keli rishon, al ha'esh.” Ah, but it’s also gemar melachtan. I mean, in terms of the result, what’s the difference? Maybe he’ll be chayav two of two.
So he says like this: ve'omnam gam leYerushalmi desavira sheyeish makeh bepatish be'ochlin, zeh davka bedavar she'eino ra'ui la'achilah kemo shehu, kekulyas ha'ispanyin, uvazeh shemetakno afilu al yedei tzonen. Even if you put cold water on it, what do I care? It has nothing to do with cooking.
“So you can’t wash fruit?” No. The fruit was edible before you washed it. You’re washing off—It’s talking about a type of fish that has salt on it. It’s inedible the way it is now. So what? It’s not cooking; I put cold water on it. I got cold water, took the salt off. Now—No, that’s clearly not going to be mevashel; that’s makeh bepatish. Aval bedavar that's ra'ui la'achilah, ela shemashbicho yoter—if you want to say, for example, an egg: technically, you can eat an egg raw. People eat raw eggs. Ela mah? You’re being mashbiach it more. Sheharei belav hachi ra'ui la'achilah. So, according to this, bebishul beitzah ein bo mishum makeh bepatish. There’s no makeh bepatish; it was edible already! Where’s the—You can’t say, “I made it edible”; it was edible!
Ela hashbachato, hashbachato, that’s already going to be Bishul. Ve'af mishum mevashel de'orayta leika. But not mishum de'oraita! Wow. Vadai, sheharei mevashel biYerushalmi ein bishul de'orayta betoledat ha'or. Like the Yerushalmi says. Oh, so now the question is going to be—Wait, the question is going to be: once we have this machloket, Bavli versus Yerushalmi, what do we hold? Halachah le'olam keshitat haBavli (the halachah follows the Bavli).
Open this Aruch HaShulchan. This is what got me excited yesterday when I saw this. Look at chaf alef. Actually, go to chaf. Go to chaf. Uveferik chaf bet din chet… It’s the Rambam. By the way, the Rambam discusses Hilchot Shabbat in two places: perek chaf bet and, I think, perek tet. So he says here: Uveferik chaf bet din chet katav davar shenitbashel kodem haShabbat o shenishrah bechamin milifnei haShabbat, af al pi shehu achshav tzonen mutar lishroto bechamin beShabbat, ad kan leshono. Ve'ein lehakshot ha kayma lan devikhli rishon asur devchehai gavna, velachen dikdek lomar mutar lishroto bechamin, kelomar velo levashel. Velashon hamishnah kach hu, kol sheba bechamin milifnei haShabbat shorin oto bechamin beShabbat, ayen sham. Velo ka'amar mevashelin devishul vadai asur. Vegam ein lomar keivan de'amru stam shorin bechamin, mashma afilu keli rishon. De'im lo chen hayah lo leva'er kedei shelo yikashlu bahalachah, im ken ha kayma lan dekeli rishon mevashel? Ach be'emet hamedakdek bedivar haRav sham yimtza degam keli rishon eino mevashel min haTorah, umin haTorah ein bishul rak keshekedairah omedet al ha'esh.
Oh. He wants to say that he saw something in the Rambam: the Rambam says ein bishul min haTorah bekeli rishon. Where is the Bishul? Only when it’s al ha'esh. Hevi Kaf Achat, vedavar zeh muva biYerushalmi. He says, “What do you want? That’s a Yerushalmi.” Ki ha, she'omer sham: ein lecha chalut barur, ein lecha tavshil barur, ela kol sheha'ur mehalech tachtav. That’s one Yerushalmi, saying that Bishul is when the fire is underneath it. The second Yerushalmi is the one we just learned: umikodem lazeh omer, asu harchakah likli rishon, velo asu harchakah likli sheni. Kelomar, dechachamim asru keli rishon mishum harchakah. Clearly, the Yerushalmi, the way they’re learning it, says it’s only isur derabbanan; they made a protective restriction. And he wants to say that’s the Rambam’s opinion.
Umishas shelanu mevo'ar gam ken. Wow. And it’s also from our Shas. How can it be from our Shas? De'al mishnah de'ilpas ukederah daf mem-bet, omer haShas lechad lishna: tani Rav Chiyya, melach eino chitvalin. The Gemara is discussing the difference between salt and spices. It says salt is not like spices; it’s very, very sensitive. Salt is very, very hard to cook. The Gemara says, melach eino chitvalin. Why? De'afilu bichli rishon nami lo bashlah: salt doesn’t get cooked even in a keli rishon. Vehainu de'amar Rav Nachman: tzricha milcha bishula kevisra detora (salt requires cooking like the meat of an ox). That means to cook salt it needs—Oh!
Veharbeh temah, says the Aruch HaShulchan on the Gemara: de'im ken, mutar min haTorah levashel bisra detora umelach? Are you telling me you’re allowed to cook salt, then? You put salt in a keli rishon. Are you telling me that if a keli rishon is mevashel, then when you put salt and bisra detora in it, you’re allowed to cook those items? The Gemara tells you that you can put it in a keli rishon? Bitemiah. Ela vadai bichli rishon lo bashlah, aval keshe'omedet al ha'ur, bashlah. Oh, so you see that in a keli rishon it doesn’t cook, but on the fire itself it does cook. You see the difference between Bishul off the fire and Bishul on the fire.
VehaRambam bi'er zeh sham bedin vav bemilot ketzarot: vechen kederah rotachat, af al pi shehoridah me'al ha'esh, kederah rotachat, you took it off the fire, lo yiten letochah tavlin, aval noten letochah melach, shehamelach eino mitbashel ela al gabei esh gedolah. Harei lehedya kedevareinu. Wow. So he wants to say that according to the Rambam, it’s only isur derabbanan.
The Aruch HaShulchan has a rule: the Rambam wrote two different perakim of Bishul. Why did he split up the perakim? Look at what the Aruch HaShulchan writes here in yud-chet. Do me a favor, boys, just check off the ones we learned so we don’t—We did chaf, we did chaf-alef, now we’re doing yud-chet. We did alef. Uda. Someone read yud-chet. Uda shehaTur vehaShulchan Aruch katvu kol dinei bishul besiman zeh. Zeh. All the laws of Bishul are in this siman. VehaRambam? VehaRambam chalkah lishnei mekomot, beperek tet uveperek chaf-bet. Why did the Rambam split it into two perakim, perek tet and perek chaf-bet? Vehata'am? Vehata'am lefi shebiperek tet bi'er bishulei Torah, uveperek chaf-bet bi'er—Oh, in perek tet, it’s all the Bishul of the Torah, and in perek chaf-bet, it’s all the Bishul derabbanan.
The Rambam did that, by the way. The Shulchan Aruch doesn’t do that, because the Shulchan Aruch doesn’t care legabei korban chatat, or no korban chatat. But the Rambam wrote the laws also according to the times of the Beit HaMikdash (Temple). So the Rambam gives you what’s isur min haTorah and what’s isur derabbanan. He gave us that advantage by putting them in two different chapters. One chapter is all the isur derabbanans, and one chapter is all the isur Torahs.
Continue. Kemo shehitchel sham beperek chaf-alef, nitba'er baTorah tishbot vechulei, shegazru chachamim mishum shevut, uve'otam perakim bi'er kol dinei shevutim, shevut. But the Tur and Shulchan Aruch don’t generally explain what isur is de'oraita and what isur is derabbanan, as he wrote in siman resh-nun-bet, so they grouped everything together in one place. Ve-yesh lada'at u-lehavin zot, ki yesh nafka mina le-dina bi-sfekot, ve-safek de-oraita le-chumra ve-safika de-rabanan le-kula, ve-lachen al ha-me'ayen lehavin be-eizeh bishul anu danim, ve-anachnu be-aniyut da'atenu be-ezrat bi-siyata di-shmaya, kefi she-yecholtenu.
So now it comes out that we have—I mean, open the Rambam he was quoting. “That means everything’s derabbanan from there until the end of the Rambam? Is that what he’s saying, in perek chaf-bet?” All the halachot of Bishul in perek chaf-bet are derabbanan; all the halachot of Bishul in perek tet are de'oraita. “Yeah, but I’m saying all the Rambams from chaf-alef until the end, that means it’s derabbanan.” Perek chaf-bet. You don’t have to make it so dramatic. Perek chaf-bet is derabbanan; perek tet is de'oraita. “What are you—It’s like up to perek lamed.” Up to perek lamed? Is that all those nine chapters going to be derabbanan? Perek chaf-bet is the derabbanans. 21 it starts, chaf-alef it starts.
Now open the Rambam he quoted. Perek chaf-alef? I mean, the one he wants to say is derabbanan is in perek chaf-bet, din chet. Chaf-bet. So again, the fact that it’s in chaf-bet means, according to the Aruch HaShulchan’s rules, that it’s derabbanan. Right? “Right. But what does chaf-bet, chet say?” Davar she-nitbashel kodem ha-Shabbat o she-nishrah be-chamin mi-lifnei ha-Shabbat, af al pi she-hu achshav tzonen mutar le-sharoto be-chamin be-Shabbat. Ve-davar she-hu tzonen me-ikaro ve-lo ba be-chamin me-olam medichin oto be-chamin be-Shabbat, im lo haytah hadachah zo gemar melachto. Aval ein shorin oto be-chamin.
So if he’s learning that all these things are derabbanan, this is the Mishnah that said hadachah zo hi gemar melachtan and all that, and here he brings it in perek chaf-bet. So he wants to say it’s derabbanan. “You don’t know what kind of davar he’s talking about.” Whatever it is, this is what the Mishnah says: hu gemar melachtan. It has to be the same kind of item as the one in the Mishnah. “Maybe cooking is easy, no?” Okay, but maybe it’s still derabbanan. What do I know? Maybe it says asur. It doesn’t say mutar; it says asur. “It doesn’t tell you it’s an isur de'oraita; it says asur.” What does it say? Does it say isur de'oraita there? It doesn’t say isur de'oraita. “Right, if whoever classified this as isur derabbanan—” Because it’s chamin. It’s toldat ha'or. Maybe these are different items. There’s no or here, but clearly this is water. According to his rule, which says that in chaf-bet it’s all derabbanan, why did he put this into the de'oraita? He should put it in perek tet.
I’m not making up this rule; he’s saying the rule. Is that a rule? Does everybody accept it? I’m reading you the Aruch HaShulchan. I haven’t taken a survey of all the Rishonim and Acharonim who accept this rule. Based on his rule here, we would have put this halachah in perek tet. We just learned from the Bavli—what does the Aruch HaShulchan do with the Gemara we just learned? The Gemara says, “Gilgel mai?” Gilgel mai? Gilgel chayav chatat. The Gemara brings that. I mean, he brings a different Bavli that wants to say it’s derabbanan, but what does he do with our Gemara? The Gemara clearly discusses the case of the egg.
There’s another way to learn the Yerushalmi, by the way, that I want to teach you today. Are you ready for a different way of learning the Yerushalmi? It’s the way the ha-Gaon mi-Vilna learned it. Let’s see if we can see the ha-Gaon inside. Do we have Shulchan Aruch sefarim, the big ones? Shin-yod-chet. Okay, leave it; it’s too far, too much trouble. I’ll read it to you inside. Not that Shulchan Aruch, the real Shulchan Aruch, the one with the ha-Gaon mi-Vilna. We need the ha-Gaon mi-Vilna. We should have shin-yod-chet. This is a big halachah to know. A lot of times we cook only with something hot, without a fire—all the keli rishons that we use. A keli rishon mevashel; that’s toldat ha'or. So it’s important to know the severity. What are we going to hold? Is it isur de'oraita or not? Now we already have the Aruch HaShulchan holding that the Rambam holds this is all derabbanan.
He says here: U-Vi'ur Hagra peirish divrei ha-Yerushalmi she'ein hayad sholetet bo hainu shehayad soledet bo. That’s the way we learned it. Sholetet means soledet. Right? Sholetet, soledet. Therefore, when it says ein hayad sholetet, it means ein hayad soledet, meaning it’s not hot; and yad sholetet means yad soledet, meaning it is hot. Good. That’s the way we learned it. When the beraita said ein hayad sholetet, the word sholetet means soledet. So ein hayad soledet means it’s not hot, and hayad sholetet means yad soledet; that means it is hot. U-Vi'ur Hagra peirish divrei ha-Yerushalmi keda'at ha-Shach asher peirish she'ein hayad sholetet hainu shehayad soledet bo. Good, sholetet, soledet. So ein hayad sholetet hainu shehayad soledet bo: if your hand can’t control it, that means it is yad soledet. That’s correct! Ein hayad sholetet: your hand can’t hold it. Why can’t you control it? Because it’s hot; it’s yad soledet.
Vechen vechen muchach bereish divrei ha-Yerushalmi shekatav mutar lehafshir bimkom shehayad sholetet ve'asur lehafshir bimkom she'ein hayad sholetet. The Yerushalmi earlier said that if I have an item and I don’t want to cook it, I just want to—No, no, lehafshir, to warm it up a little. It says: mutar lehafshir bimkom shehayad sholetet aval asur lehafshir bimkom she'ein hayad sholetet. Good! I can warm something only in a place that isn’t so hot, but if the place is very hot, I cannot be mafshir. He’s showing you that the word sholetet is like soledet. U-shema minah demashma'ut sholetet mi-leshon shelitah: can I control it or not? Based on how you understand the word sholetet, it will be the opposite of soledet. Ein hayad sholetet means my hand cannot; that means it is soledet. Hayad sholetet means it’s ein soledet. Good.
Ela delifi zeh kasheh amai ka'amar de'asu harchakah beyad soledet. Back to the question: why does Rabbi Yochanan in the Yerushalmi say that if it’s ein hayad sholetet, meaning it’s very hot, they made a harchakah for keli rishon? Lich'orah it should be asur min haTorah, like we learned from the Bavli. Good question, right? So the ha-Gaon mi-Vilna has a different way of understanding it. Ela delifi zeh kasheh amai ka'amar de'asu harchakah beyad soledet halo yesh issur mishum bishul me'ikar hadin ve-teireitz Hagra al pi mah shekatav Maran.
Maran, in se'if yod-dalet of shin-yod-chet, is going to say that it’s mutar lehafshir keneged hamedurah, provided shelo yitein bimkom sheyachol lehagi'a lechom shehayad soledet bo shema yishkach. Later we’ll learn a halachah that you’re allowed to take raw food, or food that’s subject to Bishul, and put it next to the fireplace. But you have to put it far enough away that it will never be able to get cooked. Even if you put it closer and say, “I’ll move it in two minutes before it gets cooked,” we say shema yishkach (lest he forget). So you can only put it in a place where it will never reach yad soledet bo. That’s a gezeirah the chachamim made here: de-mutar lehafshir—lehafshir is to warm up—keneged hamedurah, the fire, u-vilvad shelo yitein bimkom sheyachol lehagi'a lechom shehayad soledet bo, shema yishkach.
Ve-gam poh airi ha-Yerushalmi bechi hai gavna u-chemo le'eil shebizeh asak ha-Yerushalmi. Here the Yerushalmi is discussing, according to the ha-Gaon mi-Vilna, lehafshir bi-chli rishon. You want to warm something in a keli rishon. Ve-hayah lanu lehatir sheharei eino mevashelo ela rak mafshiro. You just want to put it in for one second and take it out. Your kavanah (intention) is not to cook it; your kavanah is just to warm it up. So lich'orah you should be able to drop it in for a second and pull it out. Ach asru chachamim lehafshir bi-chli rishon mishum harchakah. Why? Bichdei shelo yavo lidei bishul. Where would the Bishul happen? In the keli rishon itself! If I forget the item in there, what’s going to happen? I’m going to cook it. So they don’t even let me warm it up in a keli rishon.
That’s a problem. What do I care? If I’m sitting in the dark, am I supposed to turn on the light? No, tough luck! The point is, the Yerushalmi is learning that I can’t warm something in a hot keli rishon, even though I’m not going to cook it; I’m taking it out in two seconds. Because what’s going to happen? Asu harchakah. What’s the harchakah? It might cook it, and it could be de'oraita. So according to the ha-Gaon mi-Vilna, he learns that the Yerushalmi is also de'oraita, even a keli rishon shelo al ha'esh.
If you learn the Yerushalmi like the Gaon, you have no machloket between the Yerushalmi and the Bavli. “That’s how the Gaon was learning? Otherwise it wouldn’t have been harchakah, right?” That’s what you’re saying. The harchakah isn’t talking about cooking in a keli rishon sheyad soledet bo, because if you’re cooking in a yad soledet bo, it’s de'oraita, so you don’t need a harchakah for that. According to the ha-Gaon mi-Vilna, that’s clearly isur de'oraita. The case is that I took an item and my kavanah wasn’t to cook it; it was to warm it up. My kavanah was to put it in for 30 seconds and, before it cooks, pull it out. The Yerushalmi says, “Asur.” Why? Asu harchakah. What’s the harchakah? Shema yishkach—like Maran wrote in yud-dalet. And what will happen if he forgets? Then he has cooked it.
If it were only isur derabbanan if you left it in there, we wouldn’t make a harchakah on a harchakah. Ela, it must be that the ha-Gaon mi-Vilna learned the Yerushalmi to mean that cooking in a keli rishon shelo al gabei ha'esh is isur de'oraita. So it’s another way of learning the Yerushalmi that comes out with a different result. According to that, we have a Bavli and a Yerushalmi that both agree that toldat ha'or is isur de'oraita.
What does Maran hold, rabotai? What does Maran hold? Gimel. Ah, you have a gimel? Gimel, Maran. Shulchan Aruch. What does he say? Keshem she'asur levashel ba'or, kach asur levashel betoldat ha'or. Asur what—asur de'oraita or asur derabbanan? Kegon sheyiten beitzah betzad kederah o sheyegalgelenah al sudar shehucham ba'or kedei shetitztaleh, ve'afilu betoledat chamah.
I would agree with you, by the way. Not here. Now, maybe we can make a diyuk (inference) here, because—Which halachah are you in, yud-dalet? Gimel. Siman shin-yod-chet, gimel. Read gimel again, higher. Keshem she'asur levashel ba'or, kach asur levashel betoldat ha'or. And by the way, why would Maran bring keshem, keshem? Maran is comparing or and toldat ha'or as the same thing, putting them in the same halachah. Right. Why would Maran put them bechada machta (together in one place)? It sounds like it’s isur de'oraita. “Yeah, it sounds like de'oraita.” Very good, then. That’s a good find. Read that again; give me the reading again. Keshem she'asur levashel ba'or. Everybody holds it’s asur de'oraita. Kach asur levashel betoldat ha'or. Mah zeh omer? If keshem, keshem; keshem, kach.
Does he quote a source for that in the margin? Shabbat lamed-chet amud bet, bamishnah katanei tanna kamma deRabbi Yosei, haRif vehaRambam perek tet. Ah, haRif vehaRambam. Leave the Rif; maybe that’s on or. But perek tet of the Rambam. What halachah in perek tet? It just says haRambam perek tet. In Beit Yosef? Shabbat perek tet. What do you say, he has this whole piece? Find it in hachacham hazeh, Guy's book as they call it. In perek tet he talks about the egg? It’s 47. In Guy's book it’s 47. Yeah, bet. Bet is the egg? Yep.
Hanoten beitzah betzad chamim bishvil shetitgalgel venitgalgelah, chayav, shehambashel betoledat ha'or kimevashel be'or atzmah. That’s all? Oh. The Rambam is very, very clear, rabotai. He also holds with the fish like the Bavli. So mevashel betoldat ha'ur kimvashel be'ur atzmah—the Rambam is very, very clear, then.
So now we have a difference here. Toldat ha'or there is the egg case: you put the egg next to the kumkum, next to the fire. The note 547 says that it is anytime something can warm it up, even toldat—Read it to me. Ken asur min haTorah levashel al yedei tanur chashmali, o meycham chashmali, o kirayim chashmaliyot, o platah chashmalit, keivan shenechshavim levishul be'esh gemurah. Ve'afilu besha'ah she'eynam mechubarim lezerem hachashmal, kol shehem chamim be'ofen shema'achal yachol lehitbashel betocham, asur min haTorah, shenechshav hadavar levishul betoldat ha'esh. Ah, beautiful! He says in Yabi'a Omer? Oh, Yabi'a Omer. So Chacham Ovadia holds—Yabi'a Omer, which volume? I’m not sure. It just says Yabi'a Omer, bekamah duchtei, sheyesh chiyuv sekilah behadlakat…
So, from Maran, you’re clearly right. I agree with you on toldat ha'or. But what is he saying there? What is the Aruch HaShulchan saying? When the Aruch HaShulchan says this, he’s only talking legabei keli rishon. What does he say at the end, when he says that according to the Rambam, aval noten… Harei lehedya kedevareinu dahu what? Umin haTorah ein bishul rak keshehakdeirah omedet al ha'esh. Except for the items that you can cook. What are the items you can cook? What do you mean? It says in the Rambam—pshat. “Wait, in the Rambam?” We’re reading the Aruch HaShulchan. He says, ach ha'emet hamedakdek bidvarav sham yireh shegam keli rishon eino mevashel min haTorah, umin haTorah ein bishul rak keshehakdeirah omedet al ha'esh.
I guess he’s making a chilluk between a keli rishon that’s not on the esh and this meycham. In this case, you weren’t cooking with the water; you were cooking with the heat of the metal. The metal of the meycham got hot. You understand? The Rambam isn’t arguing about the metal case. He can’t argue about the metal case. The Bavli clearly says gilgel chayav. That’s the case of the metal. What was that metal case? They heated up the metal. They heated the urn, and the metal got hot, and you put the egg next to it. The Rambam clearly says that’s asur. That’s not on the fire.
The Rambam clearly says, shehamvashel betoldat ha'ur kimvashel be'ur atzmah. Vechen hamadi'ach bachamin, madi'ach hayashan, kol sheken spanin, o dag dak rach veheyoto lezeh chayav, shezeh hadachah bachamim zo gemar bishulam, vechen kol hayotzei bahem. So clearly, from this Rambam, it holds that pouring hot water on it and all these other things is chayav, asur de'oraita; there’s no doubt. The only thing is that we have a Yerushalmi. That’s the only thing we have to contend with.
And, by the way, you can learn the Yerushalmi as not arguing on the Bavli. There are two ways to learn it. I can learn it as saying that cooking in water is an isur harchakah. What’s the harchakah? You might come to put it on the fire. Okay, if it’s harchakah, then it’s isur derabbanan. So then we have a machloket between the Bavli and Yerushalmi, and I’m stuck. Or I can learn it like the Gaon mi-Vilna: no, the harchakah was that I can’t warm something up in a keli rishon, shema yishkach. Because shema yishkach would make it isur de'oraita, and here too it’s isur de'oraita. Therefore, I don’t care whether it’s or or toldat ha'or.
So from Maran, I think we have a clear derech (approach), and from the Rambam as well, that there’s no difference between or and toldat ha'or. Bottom line: if a keli rishon is yad soledet, and you put something in it—a raw food, whatever it is—and it’s hot enough to cook, don’t tell me, “Ah, but fire!” Don’t tell me, “Ah, but fire!” It’s de'oraita. Read gimel. Look at Maran’s lashon in gimel. Keshem… Keshem she'asur levashel ba'or, kach asur levashel betoldat ha'or.
And what does the Mishnah Berurah say? Hamevashel chayav. He says chayav; he uses the word chayav. What is toldat ha'or? A hot pot that isn’t on the fire. Toldat ha'or is something disconnected from its source: it received heat, but it’s off the source. What’s the difference between hot water that received heat and is off the thing, yad soledet bo, and hot metal that received heat? Bottom line, the or isn’t there. It’s a toldah; it received the or. “Yeah.”
Okay, so now we have clarity that ein hevdel (there is no distinction) between or and toldat ha'or legabei chiyuv Bishul on Shabbat: sheneihem chayav chatat (both are liable for a sin-offering). However, if someone tells you, “No, toldat ha'or is derabbanan,” ah, zeh lefi shitah achat biYerushalmi. You can learn the Yerushalmi that way. Not everybody does, but there is one way to learn it that way; in hachi nami. But from our Gemara it is mashma clearly from the case of gilgul. Gilgel mai? Gilgel, chayav chatat. The gilgul case is talking about cooking it via toldat ha'or. Are we clear? Yeah.
Okay, we’ll stop here. Baruch Hashem le'olam, amen ve'amen. Go further in the Ran, for sure. It says like toldat chamah. Zeh goy? Ach ben Torah! Baruch Hashem. Thank you.