QUESTION: The Gemara asks, "What [is the status of the food] if one transgressed and did Shehiyah?" What is the Gemara's question? The Gemara just concluded a lengthy discussion in which it addressed, and answered, that very question!

The Gemara taught that if the food was not cooked yet, whether one intentionally left it on the stove or unintentionally left it there, it is forbidden b'Di'eved. If the food was cooked, then Rebbi Meir permits it (even if it was intentionally left on the stove) and Rebbi Yehudah forbids it (if it is a food that becomes tastier the more it is cooked, "Mitz'tamek v'Yafeh Lo"). Since the Gemara clarified the Halachah, what is the Gemara asking now?

(a) TOSFOS (DH Avar) explains that the Gemara's question is what the Halachah would be according to Rebbi Yehudah, who says that cooked food that was left on the stove is forbidden if it was Mitz'tamek v'Yafeh Lo. Does Rebbi Yehudah forbid the food only when it was left on the stove intentionally, but not when it was left here unintentionally, or does he forbid the food even when it was left there unintentionally? (Rebbi Yehudah did not specifically mention that the food is prohibited even when it was left on the burner b'Shogeg; perhaps he discussed only a case where it was left there b'Mezid.)

The explanation of Tosfos raises a different question. The Gemara says that if one forgot and left food on the stove, the Rabanan penalized him and prohibited him from benefiting from the food. Since this decree was made after the time of Rebbi Yehudah, what difference does it make if Rebbi Yehudah permitted the food that was left on the stove unintentionally? Rebbi Yehudah's opinion is irrelevant nowadays, when the decree of the Rabanan prohibits the food!

1. TOSFOS answers that the Gemara was merely curious as to what Rebbi Yehudah's original opinion was, before the Rabanan enacted the decree to prohibit the food.

2. The TOSFOS HA'ROSH explains that the decree that prohibits the food that was left on the stove unintentionally applies only to the person himself who left the food there. Perhaps it does not prohibit the food to all other people. The Gemara is asking whether the food indeed is permitted to everyone else or not.

3. The RA'AVAD cited by the RASHBA explains that there is a difference between one who "forgets" (Shoche'ach) the food on the stove and one who leaves the food there by accident (b'Shogeg). When one leaves it there b'Shogeg, the Halachah is lenient and permits him to benefit from it, because he was completely unaware that it was Shabbos (or that it was forbidden to do so on Shabbos) when he left the food there. In contrast, one who forgot that he had placed the food on the stove was aware that Shabbos was coming at the time that he placed the food on the stove, but he forgot to remove it before Shabbos arrived. Therefore, the Rabanan were stringent and decreed that he may not eat the food.

4. The RAMBAN adds that perhaps the penalty applies only to food that was not entirely cooked, but not to food that was entirely cooked before Shabbos. The Rabanan did not prohibit food that was entirely cooked, because there is no concern that one might intentionally place a fully-cooked dish on the stove and claim that he did so inadvertently, with intention to make the cooked dish a little more tasty on Shabbos.

(b) RABEINU YONAH cited by the RASHBA and the RAMBAN says that the Chachamim who asked the question, "What [is the status of the food] if one transgressed and did Shehiyah?" were unaware of the Beraisa quoted previously, in which Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Yehudah argue over that point. They were asking what the Halachah is when one intentionally left a fully cooked dish on the stove which is Mitz'tamek v'Yafeh Lo. In such a case, did the Rabanan decree that it is forbidden? (The Rashba says that this is also Rashi's intention.)

(c) The TOSFOS HA'ROSH explains that the Gemara's question is what the Halachah would be if one leaves on the stove food which improves as it gets drier, and that food is already as dry as it will get. Did the Rabanan apply their decree in such a case, or is such a case comparable to hot water, which does not improve when left on the stove?

(d) The RITVA says that the Gemara is discussing a case in which one removed the pot from the stove before it had a chance to improve. Did the Rabanan decree that the very act of placing it on the stove (when there is a chance that it will improve) makes the food forbidden, even if in the end it does not improve at all, or did they only decree that the food is forbidden when it actually undergoes some improvement. (When the Gemara attempts to answer the question from the case of "dried out eggs," it is referring to a case in which one removed the eggs from the stove before they had a chance to become more dried out.)

QUESTION: Rav Sheshes and Rav Oshiya maintain that one may return a pot of cooked food to the stove (Chazarah) "even on Shabbos." What is their intention? The concept of Chazarah is relevant only for Shabbos! When else would there be a question whether one may return food to the stove?

(a) RASHI explains that the Gemara is teaching that even during the daytime on Shabbos one may do Chazarah. We might have thought that Chazarah may be done only at night, because when one removes the pot from the stove during the day there is no indication that one's intention is to put it back on the stove.

(b) TOSFOS (36b, DH Beis Hillel) says that the prohibition against doing Chazarah when the stove's coals are not cleared away applies on Friday before Shabbos. On Friday, when the food is cold and there is not enough time for it to become hot before Shabbos, one may not put it back on the stove because he might be tempted to stoke the coals to warm it up on Shabbos. (Even if it is still warm, it might be forbidden to put it back on the stove if there is not enough time for it to become warm had it been cold, because an onlooker might mistakenly assume that it is permissible to put it back on the stove when it is cold, and he might forget and stoke the coals to make it warm.)

According to Tosfos, Beis Hillel means that one may do Chazarah not only on Friday but even on Shabbos (as the Amora'im here teach) when the coals are covered. (Beis Hillel agrees that if the coals are not covered, then even on Friday Chazarah is prohibited).

(c) The RAN explains that the last argument in the Mishnah between Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel involves the prohibition of doing an action that will lead to a Melachah being done by itself on Shabbos. Both Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel are consistent with their opinions expressed elsewhere. Beis Shamai requires that there be enough time for the food to become hot before Shabbos (19b) in order for one to be permitted to place food on the stove before Shabbos; the Melachah must begin before Shabbos, for otherwise there is a concern that people will think that it is permissible to do Melachah on Shabbos (this is according to one explanation of Beis Shamai's view, and not according to the explanation that Beis Shamai forbids Melachah before Shabbos because of Shevisas Kelim; see 18a). Here, Beis Shamai prohibits Chazarah on Friday immediately before Shabbos (as Tosfos also explains), when the food will become hot only on Shabbos, so that people not think that it is permissible to heat up food on Shabbos (this reason for the prohibition of Chazarah on Friday is not like Tosfos' reason). Beis Hillel permits Chazarah on Friday, because he maintains that the Rabanan did not prohibit actions before Shabbos that would cause Melachah to be done on Shabbos. However, we might have thought that Chazarah on Shabbos is prohibited according to everyone, even Beis Hillel, because it looks as though one is cooking on Shabbos. Therefore, the Gemara teaches that Beis Hillel permits Chazarah even on Shabbos.