Shabbos 36 – שבת לו

The Gemara concludes that the Mishna begins with a discussion of Chazara, then proceeds to Shehiya, then concludes with a machlokes pertaining to Chazara – that Beis Shamai never allow Chazara altogether.  Why does the Mishna interject with Shehiya rather than first concluding with the din of Chazara and then proceeding over to Shehiya?

The Mishna states that fuel of straw doesn’t present a concern since no coals are formed.  If so how do we understand Bais Shamai  who prohibit (shehiya of tavshil or chazara) even by ‘garuf’ (coals were shoveled) when there are no coals present?

2 thoughts on “Shabbos 36 – שבת לו

  1. Shehiya was only mentioned as a Diyuk, on a parenthetical note. Therefore, we finish its Din before moving on to the main point of the Mishna.

    When you use a fuel of the type that can be problematic, as in you might forget and bring more, there is what to be worried about. When you are using straw, you never had in mind to use coal in the first place so there is no reason to think that you will go ahead and add coal.

  2. you have a very good point, it is very not understood.
    so tosfos on lamed zein umud alef top tosfos explains that the gemarah had to give this answer because we know that the halacha is like chananya so we try fitting the mishna to be like him even if its not so understood

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *