Daf 42

67) You can't put a utensil under a lamp on Shabbos to catch dripping oil, but you may put it there on Friday, as long as you don't have pleasure from the oil on Shabbos. [Tosfos says that the author is R' Shimon who doesn't forbid the oil only when it's lit. [Maharsha: since it's seems that it's only forbidden to partake in it, but not because it's Muktza.] Therefore, it's only forbidden while it's lit, since it's Muktza for the Mitzvah, it's Muktza for having to transgress a sin. (I.e., since it's designated for the Mitzva of Shabbos candles as long as the lamp is lit, it's also Muktza because it's designated to be in a position that it will take a sin to remove the oil, like here where you would transgress extinguishing on Shabbos when you remove oil from the lamp. Granted, once it dripped, it doesn't have that prohibition on it; but it remains Muktza as long as the light is lit.)

The reason you can't move the lamp is because the lamp, oil and wick are all Bosis, i.e., a base, for a Muktza; i.e., the flame. (However, you can't say because; it's Muktza for the Mitzvah, like the reason he forbids the oil; since moving it doesn't stop the Mitzvah from being done, which is not like when you remove some oil, which would stop the light from burning longer).]

Similarly, R' Chisda says that you can't put a utensil under a chicken to catch one of her eggs; but, if she laid one on the floor, you can overturn a bowl over it to protect it.

68) Rabbah explains the reason: we don't allow saving objects on Shabbos from uncommon perils. [Rashi explains: this applies only for Muktza. However, Tosfos says, it seems from the case later, that this Halacha applies to a barrel that we'll explain contains non-Muktza items. Rather, it applies even to non-Muktza items because we don't want him exerting effort on Shabbos for this.]

69) [Tosfos explains: even though dripping oil from a lamp is very common; still, since it's ultra-common, we expect someone to place the utensil to catch the oil on Friday afternoon. So, it's uncommon to need to place a utensil there on Shabbos. However, perils that are not as common, it's not common to set up something to rectify it on Friday for perhaps it might happen, but they're somewhat a common occurence; so you're allowed to save it on Shabbos.]

70) Although we allow, if a barrel breaks on your roof, to place a utensil underneath in order to catch its contents; that's only by a new barrel, which is more common to break. [Rashi explains that the contents are Tevel, and therefore, Muktza. However, Tosfos asks: the Braisa continues to say that; if you now invite guests (they may save extra for themselves to eat), so, it must be that they already separated the Trumah and Maasar.]

Daf 43

71) This, that we allow to place a utensil under a lamp to catch sparks, because sparks are common. This, that we allow to place a utensil over a lamp so that a beam shouldn't catch fire, refers to a house with a low ceiling where it's common to catch on fire. This, that we allow to bring a bench and place it against a broken beam so that it doesn't break more refers to a new beam that's common to break. This, that we allow bringing a utensil to catch a drip in the house also refers to a new house that's common to leak.

72) R' Yosef explains the reason why we can't put a utensil under the oil: (since the oil is Muktza, and when it will land in the utensil, the utensil will be the base of Mukzta, and will become the Muktza of Bosis); and it's forbidden to make a utensil Muktza on Shabbos. [Rashi explains: since you can't move it anymore, it looks like you fastened the utensil to the ground with cement. Tosfos says that Rashi at the end of the Mesechta says that it's like you demolished the utensil (since you can't move it like you could move regular utensils, and like you could move it before).]

73) Although we allow you to take a utensil and catch Tevel produce from a broken barrel, that's because Tevel is not really Muktza. After all, if someone would B'dieved transgress and fix it on Shabbos by separating Trumah and Maasar, it would be fixed and be regular produce. [Tosfos explains: of course, in the meanwhile, the Tevel is Muktza and can't be moved, as the Mishna says explicitly in the eighteenth Perek. However, it's not considered Muktza regarding this prohibition to make the utensil a base for Muktza.]

74) [Tosfos also explains: this, that we say it's permitted if someone separated Maasar only refers to a case where you don't have any other fruit that you can eat. However, if you have other fruit to eat, we don't allow eating the fruits that someone purposely transgressed separating Maasar. It's only permitted if he forgot that it's prohibited.]

75) [Tosfos says: although the case where the utensil caught a laid egg on Shabbos, if you would transgress and remove the Muktza egg, the utensil will also become not Muktza; still, since you can never move it while the egg is still in there, it's considered part of the prohibition of making a utensil Muktza on Shabbos. We only allow by Tevel, since, when Maasar is separated, you may move that basket with the original fruit inside.]

76) [Tosfos asked some unanswered questions on this Halacha that the fruits that were Tevel become not Muktza after separating Maasar: first of all, since it was Muktza during the Bein Hashmashes coming into Shabbos, the rule is that it remains Muktza for the whole day even after it becomes fit to eat. So, the same should apply to Tevel fruit. Also, we say later that you're not allow to check a Bechor animal if it has a permanent blemish on Yom Tov, and if you do check it and it's a blemish, it remains forbidden. So, why do we permit the fruit that Maasar was wrongfully taken off on Shabbos?]

77) This, that we allow to place a utensil to catch sparks, that's because sparks don't have substance, so you're not left with Muktza in the utensil. This, that they allowed placing the bench by the broken beam is only when it's loose and you can always pull it out. This, that we allow placing the utensil under the drip, it refers to a drip that's fit to drink and is not Muktza.

78) This, that we allow overturning a utensil before a chicken coop to help chicks descend (although the chicks are Muktza) is because it's only forbidden when they're on it, but it wouldn't be Muktza after the chicks get off. [Tosfos says that this fits well if we say that there is no Muktza for half a Shabbos (i.e., if it wasn't Muktza Bein Hashmashes, but just halfway through Shabbos, if it becomes fit again, we don't say that it remains Muktza for the rest of Shabbos). However, if we say that there is Muktza for a half a Shabbos (and the utensil should remain Muktza for the rest of Shabbos even after the chick jumps off) we must say that the author is R' Shimon who never held of the concept that it remains Muktza the whole Shabbos even if it was Muktza Bein Hashmashes. Alternatively, even according to the one who holds that it's Muktza for half of Shabbos, that's only that it's Muktza from eating, but you can still move it.

Tosfos explains that this was never a question to Rabbah since it's a common occurence that you need to help the chick descend.]

79) [Even R' Shimon would agree to the prohibition of making a utensil Muktza although it won't make the utensil forbidden for the whole Shabbos. After all, many Gemaras asks simply on many Amoraim why their cases are not making utensils Muktza, even though they might have held like R' Shimon. Although he allows by the chick case; that's because it's within your hands to shu it off.]

80) That, which a Braisa says that the utensil is forbidden even after the chick gets off; that refers to it being on the bowl all Bein Hashmashes. Once it's Muktza Bein Hashmashes, it remains Muktza the whole day. [Tosfos asks: we see that anything that's unfit Bein Hashmashes, but a man has the ability to make it fit on Shabbos, it's not Muktza. Therefore, food that was raw and on the stove Bein Hashmashes is not Muktza since you could allow it to cook and it would be fit. Also, a boiling hot stew that can't be eaten is not Muktza, since you can allow it to cool down. If so, why isn't this utensil Muktza since you can shu away the bird? Tosfos answers; by the boiling hot pot case, if he would want to eat then, he would cool off the pot right away. Even in the case where the food's raw, if it would be possible for it to be fit Bein Hashmashes, like if the pot would cook right away, of course, the person would be happy. However, here the person wants the bird to be on top of it all Bein Hashmashes, and is happy that the Muktza is on it.]

81) R' Yitzchock argues with R' Chisda and holds that the reason you can't move the utensil to save the oil and egg since you can only move utensils in order to facilitate non-Muktza items. Therefore, you can't move a utensil in order to turn it over an egg. Although we see many Braisos that seem to permit this, they refer to cases where you originally moved the utensil because you needed the place that it was in. Once it's in your hands, you can move it to facilitate a Muktza item.

82) Although we permit spreading a mat over a beehive, it must refer to one that has honey in it. Even though it says that you may cover it in the winter to protect from the rain, we must refer to the two combs that are left there for the bees' winter food. Even though this is permitted even to R' Yehuda who holds of Muktza, and these combs are Muktza since you set them aside for the bees' food; we must explain the case was where you announced before Shabbos that you're designating them for humans. [Tosfos says: although it's forbidden to detach a honeycomb from the hive on Shabbos, i.e., it's forbidden from the Torah according to R' Eliezer, and a rabbinical prohibition according to the Rabanan; still, we can say the case is that you detached the honeycomb before Shabbos, and put it back for Shabbos. Alternatively, we're only referring to the honey that's floating above the combs.]

Even though R' Yehuda holds that an unintended Melacha is forbidden, and by spreading the mats over the hive, it seems that he's unintendingly capturing bees; we must say that he leaves a big enough space open that the bees can easily escape. [Tosfos says: the Chiddush is that you still need to leave a big space even though bees are not a specie that's usually captured (and thus, only rabbinically forbidden).]

83) We see R' Huna also holds that you can only move utensils to facilitate non-Muktza items. As he holds that if you have a corpse in the sun, and you want to provide shade for it, you bring two men to sit on each side of it. When they get hot sitting on the ground, they can bring beds to sit on. if it gets hot on top of them, they bring a mat to cover them. Then they can remove the beds and leave, and you'll have the mats now spread over the corpse giving it shade. [Tosfos points out: we only allow in that order, spreading the mat, and then removing the bed for the space underneath. By that way, you're making the tent from top first and then making the space for the bottom, the same way we allow making many tent like structures. The living people don't need to remain there to constantly show that it was made for living people, since they only required it at the time they were making it, but not after it was already made.

This, that we don't just say that they should originally bring beds to sit on; or just wait until they're hot below and above, and bring the bed and mat at the same time; since doing it one step at a time shows more that it's brought for the living men, since the bed is brought as soon as they need it.]

84) [Tosfos says: although we see R' Huna, at the end of the Mesechta, allows bringing mats to drop the Muktza (that your animal is carrying) on so it wouldn't break; we must say that he originally only moved the mat because he needed to use the place where the mat was stored. Alternatively, they made an exception here so you shouldn't suffer a big loss. When the Gemara says there "we only permit because it's a big loss," it means because of the prohibition of moving a utensil for a Muktza object.]

85) [Tosfos asks: in Eiruvin, R' Huna doesn't allow spreading out a sheet to cover the sheep unless you kept a Tefach of the sheet spread out from before Shabbos (so it would only be adding to a temporary tent, and not making it) and here we allow making this tent without a Tefach start. Tosfos answers: there is different, since there are partitions to the area, so it looks more like a tent, and here we don't have any partitions.

Although he allows there to cover them even though it's only facilitating Muktza, i.e., the livestock; perhaps he doesn't consider just spreading the sheet out more as a full-fledge moving. Alternatively, we refer to a case where a man was also sitting there, so it's done for the man. Alternatively, since we're afraid of a big loss (since some sheep may be damaged), we already said that it's permitted to move a utensil for Muktza if you would have a big loss.]

86) If you have a corpse in a bed (and it needs to be moved), if you have a bread or a child; you can move it along with the bread and child. If there is no bread or child; Rav holds that it's not permitted to move by dumping it from one bed to another until you get to the desired place. Shmuel permits it since it's an indirect moving.

87) The Gemara suggests that it depends on the following Tannaic argument: Tanna Kama doesn't allow saving a corpse from a fire and, R' Yehuda b. Lakish allows. (It's assumed that you can't move it directly) so they're arguing whether you can move it by dumping it from bed to bed. The Gemara rejects this and says that everyone agrees that you usually can't dump the corpse from bed to bed. They only argue if they made an exception here to allow moving Muktza to prevent the person from becoming too upset, and he might make a rash decision and extinguish the fire. [We only allow this by a corpse because he'll become rash and he'll might extinguish a fire. However, he's not allowed to save his money, since it's not as dear to him like the body of a dead relative, we don't allow saving it. We don't worry if we prevent you that you'll come to extinguish the fire. On the contrary, we're afraid that if you will start saving it, you'll be so involved that you might come to extinguish the flame.]

88) [Tosfos asks: it seems here that we Paskin that you can't dump it from bed to bed. After all, the Gemara didn't need to reject the Braisa that everyone forbids it, but it could have said that we refer to a case where you don't have a second bed and the only way to move it is directly. The reason the Gemara chooses to say they don't allow it is because it's the true Halacha. However, this seems like a contradiction to what we Paskin like R' Elazar b. Tudai that holds that you may move Muktza indirectly, and thus allowed to take out a radish stuck in dirt even though you would be moving the Muktza dirt. Even the Rabanan only disagree when it's buried deep in an you need to stick in a needle to remove it, but allows if some of the leaves are exposed, and you may grab on to it and remove it.

Tosfos answers: we only forbid here by the corpse since the reason you're moving it is to facilitate the Muktza. However, there, you're moving it to facilitate the radish, which is not Muktza.]

89) [That, which Shmuel forbade in the fourth Perek to remove a knife stuck between rows of bricks if it wasn't removed and stuck in a second time; it can't be because you're moving Muktza (since you're knocking out some of the cement) like Rashi explains there; since Shmuel allows here to indirectly move Muktza even to facilitate the Muktza. Rather, the reason he forbids is because you're widening the hole, which is a Tolda of building.]

Daf 44

90) Regarding the leftover oil in a lamp, or in a bowl (i.e. if you lit a wick in it, but it went out before all the oil was used); R' Yehuda forbids and R' Shimon permits. [Tosfos explains: R' Shimon only permits after the flame went out. However, he agrees that the oil is Muktza while the flame is still there. R' Shimon only needed to forbid the oil because of Muktza if it dripped out while the flame is still going, but it's forbidden anyhow to remove the oil that's still in the lamp since it's considered extinguishing when removing the oil from the reservoir of an ongoing flame.]

91) [Tosfos asks: why is this any different than a Chanuka lamp that it's forbidden to have pleasure from the leftover oil forever? Tosfos answers: there, because of the dearness of the miracle and to publicize the miracle; you completely set it aside for the Mitzvah and you don't at all hope for it to go out early to have any pleasure from it. However by the Shabbos candles; the whole purpose is to have pleasure from it, so he hopes that it may go out early so to have leftovers (so it's not completely set aside for the Mitzvah) and is permitted.]

92) [Tosfos asks: we allow to use the material of a wobbly hut from Friday that fell down on Shabbos, and, yet, here; R' Yehuda forbids the oil for the whole Shabbos, and even R' Shimon forbids when the oil is dripping out while it's lit. However, they seem to be the same case, since you're hoping for both of them, the hut and oil, that they'll become fit on Shabbos. Tosfos answers: there, the Sukka was up for many days earlier and wasn't specifically made for Shabbos. However, the Shabbos candles were specifically lit so that they would be lit throughout Bein Hashmashes, and you manually made it unfit for that time; it doesn't help that you want it to go out later.]

93) R' Yehuda says that you can't move an old earthenware lamp on Shabbos (even if it wasn't lit this Shabbos) since it's disgusting (and he holds that disgusting vessels are Muktza). R' Meir permits it. R' Shimon allows moving it even if it was lit this Shabbos as long, as it's not lit now. R' Elazar b. Shimon even allows the dripping oil from a lit lamp.

94) R' Shimon agrees that, if it's in a lantern or bowl that's so big that's not expected to go out all Shabbos, he doesn't hope for it going out, and the oil is always forbidden even after it's extinguished.

95) R' Yehuda quotes Rav who says: if you designate a bed to hold money, it's Muktza after the first time you actually place money in it. [Tosfos explains: this is similar to the Muktza of a trumpet to R' Yehuda, since you don't plan to use the bed for any other use.] However, it's not Muktza if you hadn't placed money on it just like a new earthenware lamp is not Muktza according to R' Yehuda, even though an old one is Muktza because it's disgusting. [Tosfos explains: even though it's designated to be lit and to become disgusting; still, it's not Muktza since you can use it before you light it for other uses. So, of course, a bed is not Muktza before you use it for money since it wasn't designed originally to be used for money. However, a trumpet is Muktza even before you blow into it since it's not that fit for other uses.]

96) However, if you didn't designate the bed for money, it's permitted as long as the money wasn't on it all Bein Hashmashes, or, even if it wasn't on it Bein Hashmashes, it has to be also that it's not on it presently. [Tosfos explains: this last case must be that it was placed on the bed during Shabbos. After all, we can't just say that it was placed before Shabbos, but was forgotten there, (which doesn't make the bed Bosis for the whole Shabbos), since it wouldn't be Bosis at all, even for part of the Shabbos (and you may move it while the money is still on it). Rather, Tosfos explains: we refer to a case of ordering a non-Jew to place the money on it on Shabbos. According to the opinion that you have Muktza for half a Shabbos, (so, if something turns Muktza during Shabbos, it remains Muktza the rest of the Shabbos even after it became fit again. I.e., that it does not need to be Muktza during Bein Hashmashes to remain Muktza the whole Shabbos); we must say that you commanded the non-Jew or minor to remove it from the bed on Shabbos too. Therefore, it's never considered unfit since it's considered that a human can make it fit again. Alternatively, that opinion only considers it Muktza the rest of the Shabbos regarding that you can't eat it, but they still permit moving it.]

97) If you have a big box [Rashi explains that it's made for transporting humans. Tosfos disagrees. After all, then it's fit to be susceptible for Tumas Medris, and the Gemara in Bechoros says that it's susceptible for Tumah even if its volume is greater then forty Saah. Rather, it transports utensils.] Its 'Muchni' [Rashi explains: a wheel]; when it's detachable, if a Tamai person touches the box, it doesn't make the wheel Tamai. You also can't combine it to give it the volume of forty Saah not to be susceptible to Tumah. It also doesn't help protect from the Tumah of being in a tent with a corpse. [Tosfos explains it according to Rashi: although it's a wooden utensil and not an earthenware utensil, it still could protect as a tight lid utensil. Since it has the volume of forty Saah, it can't be susceptible to Tumah, so it protects like earthenware that is not susceptible to Tumah from the outside. However, it has a hole in its side that's a Tefach wide that would allow in the Tumah, but you have the wheel closing off enough of it that it's no longer a Tefach. So, if it's not detachable and meant to be left there, then it lessens the size of the hole to less than a Tefach and it protects from Tumah. However, if it's detachable (and not meant to be always attached), it doesn't protect unless it completely stuffs up the hole.] You also can't drag the wheel on Shabbos if it has money on top of it. [Tosfos explains: however, if the wheel would be part of the box; then the money was not on the main part of the object (which would be the box in our case), and is not Bosis.]

98) [However, Ri doesn't believe that a Muchni is a wheel since it's not common to leave money on top of it. Rather, it's a base that fits on the bottom of the box. If the box has a Tefach hole on its bottom, and when you place the base on it, it blocks off some of the hole (but doesn't block off the hole completely since the base also has a hole in it); only if you plan on leaving it attached does it lessen the hole to protect from Tumah. We also need to say that the box didn't travel over the grave, i.e., that the hole was directly above the grave, since the Tumah would enter the hole, even if it's the tiniest hole.]

99) Although you can move this Muchni when money is not on top of it at the moment, even though it implies that there was money on it throughout Bein Hashmashes; we must say that the author of the Mishna holds like R' Shimon. [Tosfos adds: however, you can't explain that we refer to a case where you forgot the money on it, and still, when you need to use it, you can't drag it with the money since you would need to shake the money off first. The reason you can't explain it that way: because; then you can move it while the money is on top of it if you need the place that it's on, (and you can't use the place if you drop the money there).]

However, Rav who says that it's Muktza the whole day when it's Muktza Bein Hashmashes holds like R' Yehuda [Tosfos: even regarding that something remains Muktza once it's Muktza Bein Hashmashes].

Daf 45

100) We also see that Rav forbade leaving a lamp on a tree on Yom Tov since you might remove it, which would be transgressing the rabbinical prohibition of facilitating a tree on Yom Tov. However, it's permitted to leave it on Shabbos. So, he can't hold of R' Shimon, since, according to him, you have the same problem that you'll remove the lamp from the tree after the flame went out. (Only according to R' Yehuda are we sure you'll leave it there since the lamp is Muktza the whole Shabbos.)

101) Rav admits that you can remove on Shabbos the Chanuka Menorah and hide it from the Chavarim (a Persian nation that confiscated candles) because we can rely on R' Shimon in a time of need. [Tosfos explains: but they didn't need to move the Shabbos candles since the Chaveirim allowed them, since they were needed to eat.

Tosfos asks: why did they have the Chanuka Menorah out, since we say that, in time of danger, (assuming, like when the Chaveirim are searching for them), you're allowed to light on your table, so why do you need to move the Menorah? Tosfos answers: we refer to a case where he forgot and lit it in its regular place. Alternatively, they only allowed lighting by the table by a true danger, like there is a governmental decree not to light Menorah, and not just a danger like the Chaveirim.]

102) R' Shimon even permits moving items that you manually pushed it away from use, like placing a chicken on an egg, and to plant wheat; (you may still eat the egg or wheat on Shabbos if they come available). After all, R' Shimon only forbids oil in the lamp [Tosfos: while it drips out while it's lit. After all, you can't partake with it while it's still in the lit lamp since it's like you're extinguishing it.] Once it's Muktza (exclusively set aside) for its Mitzva, it's also Muktza for the time it's forbidden to remove from the lamp (because it's extinguishing). [However, Tosfos remains with an unanswered question: why doesn't the Gemara say, like we say later, that R' Shimon only forbids by raisins and dried figs, which seems to be more comparable to the egg and wheat than the oil in the lamp?]

103) However, we see R' Shimon agrees even if its set aside exclusively for a Mitzvah without a prohibition; like we see a Halacha by Sukka decorations that are forbidden all the days of the Chag until after Shmini Atzeres. [Tosfos points out: it's only forbidden on Shmini Atzeres since it was set aside for the Mitzvah Bein Hashmashes, since you would need to eat in a Sukkka that Bein Hashmashes for it may still be Sukkos; and once it's Muktza Bein Hashmashes it remains Muktza the whole day. However, we must say that R' Shimon argues with this aspect and permits it on Shmini Atzares, since he doesn't hold of the concept that something that's Muktza Bein Hashmashes remains Muktza the whole day.] We must say that R' Shimon agrees that the Sukka is forbidden, since there is a Braisa that, by a regular hut (a Sukka not during Sukkos); the Tanna Kama says it's forbidden to take wood from the Sukka, but you may take it from next to it. [Tosfos explains; that are leaning on the walls, since it's obvious it's not part of the Sukka, but not on top of the Schach, since it looks like one thick Schach, it's like you're demolishing from the Schach.] R' Shimon allows even taking from the Sukka (if it fell down). However, R' Shimon admits that a Sukka on Sukkos is forbidden, unless you made it on condition. [Tosfos adds: the condition only helps if it's been wobbly before Yom Tov, since you're hoping for it to fall down. Otherwise, R' Shimon agrees that it remains Muktza.] (So, it's Muktza even after it fell down and there is no prohibition to it).

The Gemara answers: are earlier statement should be: the oil in the lamp is only Muktza all the time there is a prohibition to extinguish it (i.e., while it's still lit, since it's only set aside for the Mitzvah only for the time it's lit, and not longer).

104) R' Shimon only holds that raisins and dried figs (when they're in the process of drying out) are Muktza. [Tosfos brings a Yerushalmi that explains: since they become so disgusting in the meanwhile, you decide not to eat it until it's totally ready.] Therefore, you're permitted to eat other drying fruits [that don't get that ruined.] Also, Rebbi says; according to R' Shimon, unriped dates aren't Muktza (and are permitted if they turn ripe on Shabbos), since you didn't manually make them unusable (like you did when you put out the grapes and figs to dry).

105) However, R' Yehuda forbids the other drying fruit, even if you brought them to the roof to dry while you're in middle of eating it, (which would show that your mindset is more to use them). [Tosfos implies: however, if the item doesn't get ruined at all, like in the case that he's just placing them in the storehouse (that R' Yehuda usually holds becomes Muktza), it's not Muktza if it was brought there while you were eating from them.]

106) We have a Braisa that the Tanna Kama says that you can't Shecht on Yom Tov animals that go out to pasture for long periods of time since they're Muktza, but you can Shecht the more domesticated ones. The Tanna Kama defines the ones that go out too long to pasture as those that go out by Pesach and don't return until the rains. Rebbi says that those are still considered domesticated ones that you can Shecht, and he only says that those who don't ever come back within the T'chum are Muktza. Anyhow, it would seem that Rebbi held like R' Yehuda that there is Muktza, so when he said earlier that R' Shimon allowed the unriped dates, it was only according to R' Shimon, but he doesn't personally hold like him. Alternatively, he really held like R' Shimon, but these animals that go out to pasture is on the same level of drying grapes and figs that even R' Shimon holds is Muktza. Alternatively, we may say that Rebbi personally held all the animals are not Muktza. However, he's saying to the Tanna Kama, even according to you who holds of Muktza should admit that an animal shouldn't be Muktza until he never comes back in the T'chum. [Tosfos asks; how can we be in doubt what Rebbi held since we'll say later that Rebbi Paskined like R' Shimon regarding a lamp.]

107) Also, R' Yochanan held like R' Shimon. Although he doesn't allow moving a bird's nest, we must say that it's in a case where there's a dead chick in it. [Tosfos quotes a R' Yosef who says that it wouldn't be Muktza if a live chick is in it, since a live chick isn't Muktza since you can give it to a crying child to play with and make him quiet. However, Tosfos asks: if so, why is a overturn bowl before a chicken coop to help chicks descend is Bosis if the chicks aren't Muktza? Rather, we must say that it's simple that live chicks are Muktza, and they're so set aside, we consider it as the same level of Muktza like drying raisins and figs and is worse than raw meat that may not be Muktza since it's fit to feed to the dogs.] The Gemara asks: according to the opinion that R' Shimon holds that animals that die on Shabbos are not Muktza, what would you say? The Gemara answers: we refer to a case where there's a fertilized egg that a chik is growing inside resting in the nest. [Tosfos explains: which is Muktza like drying raisins and figs. Since the whole nest was designated for this, we consider the chicken laying the egg in there as if you had put the Muktza egg in there on purpose, and is Bosis.]

108) [Tosfos explains: the Gemara couldn't bring a proof that R' Yochanan holds of the concept of "once it's Muktza Bein Hashmashes, it remains Muktza for the whole Shabbos" from the fact that he forbids a Sukka on Shmini Atzeres since it was Muktza the Bein Hashmashes before. After all, there may be different since, if you would start taking away from the Sukka, you would stop having the Mitzva. However, this is no proof to the Shabbos candles since you would still have the Mitzvah if you would move the lamp a little bit.]

109) [Tosfos qualifies: even according to R' Shimon who holds a lamp is not Muktza] that's only by a lamp, but he would admit that it's forbidden to move a candelabra. Reish Lakish says that you can't move it if it's too big to move with one hand, and you need both hands to carry it. R' Yochanan forbids even those that can be moved with one hand. We can't say that it's forbidden since it's very big and people designate a place to leave it and they don't move it from there, so it's Muktza. That can't be. After all, they allow setting up a canopy bed although people also designate to leave it in one place. [Tosfos qualifies: that it's designated to leave it in one place at the same level as one would leave a candelabra. However, we see that they did hold of Muktza for weaving machinery that people strongly designate a place for it.]

Rather, the problem with the candelabra is that you may drop it and it would fall apart, and you'll come to put it back together.

Daf 46

110) The Gemara qualifies this: there is no argument if the candelabra was made of separate pieces that it's forbidden no matter how small it is. [Tosfos says: even though the Gemara in Beitza says that Beis Hillel allows setting up a candelabra; according to the opinion later that allows placing a leg into a bed loosely, we can say that Beis Hillel allows placing the pieces in loosely, and we're afraid by the broken candelabra that you'll tighten the pieces. However, according to the opinion that you can't even return the leg into the bed loosely, we must say that Beis Hillel only allows if the pieces of the candelabra were attached, but they're adjustable and they're sometime folded up, and, in other times, set up.]

111) They only argue in a case where it's not made of separate pieces, but just have scratches and notches that are designed into it and is made to look as they're from separate pieces, they decreed it to be forbidden because you may come to move a candelabra that's truly from separate pieces. Therefore, Reish Lakish held that you don't need to make this decree by small candelabras since they're rarely made from separate pieces. However, R' Yochanan decided that we should make the decree in all cases.

112) R' Yehuda (the Amorah) says that an oil lamp is permitted to move, but a Neft lamp is forbidden (since it's very disgusting). Rabbah and R' Yosef says that even a Neft lamp is permitted. [Rashi says that we refer to a lamp that was lit on Shabbos and it's permitted according to R' Shimon. Tosfos says that it can be even according to R' Yehuda if it wasn't lit. Therefore, R' Yehuda (Amorah) held that Neft is forbidden even to R' Shimon who usually holds something is not Muktza when it's disgusting because Neft is exceedingly disgusting. However, Rabbah and R' Yosef held that it's not Muktza even like R' Yehuda who holds an old earthenware lamp is Muktza since it's disgusting, but Neft is not really disgusting but just very foul smelling.]

113) you can move a Neft lamp since you can use it for a permitted use; to cover other vessels. This is similar to what we allow carrying jewelry in the courtyard even though it's forbidden to wear on Shabbos. [Tosfos asks: R' Yehuda Nesiah wore a signet ring in a courtyard and brought a proof that it's permitted from this jewelry case, even though the Braisa infers that you're not allowed to wear it. Tosfos answers: this signet ring is not an ornament, and therefore, even when it's on your finger, it's not considered as wearing it. This is why one is Chayiv a Chatos for wearing it out into the Reshus Harabim.] However, the Gemara concludes: this is not similar to a stone, that though it's also fit to use as a cover of a vessel, it's forbidden to move since it's not a utensil like the lamp.

114) The Gemara asks: why does R' Shimon allow the leftover oil in a lamp and doesn't allow a Bechor that got a permanent blemish on Yom Tov? The Gemara answers: by the lamp, you're looking forward to when your lamp will go out so you can use the oil. However, by a Bechor, your not looking forward to it becoming permitted since, who said it would get a blemish? Even if it gets a blemish, who said that it would be permanent? Even if it's permanent, who says that you'll find a Chachum to permit it? [Tosfos explains: you don't need all three "who says" for R' Shimon to forbid. After all, we see he has an argument with R' Yehuda if a Bechor is permitted, and R' Yehuda would only permit if it had a permanent blemish from before Yom Tov or else he would hold that it's Muktza. Therefore, we must say that R' Shimon forbids in that case with one "who says"; i.e., who says a Chachum would permit it? R' Yehuda doesn't hold that to be a problem since he allows a Chachum to check blemishes on Yom Tov, but R' Shimon forbids him. Therefore the owner is not confident that a Chachum would check it out.]

115) That, which we allowed a husband to annul his wife's vow on Shabbos and we don't say "who says that her husband will annul it?" [Tosfos explains: and we already explained that the items are Muktza with one "who says." Tosfos asks: why would I assume that the fruit she vowed from should be Muktza like the Bechor, since other people may partake in it, even if she cant? Tosfos answers: even though it would be permitted to move, but it would be Muktza for her to eat it just as it was forbidden, i.e., Muktza, to her to eat during Bein Hashmashes. Alternatively, we're referring to a case where it was her fruit, and she made a vow to forbid it to everyone, so it wasn't edible for anyone Bein Hashmashes.

Tosfos explains: although the reason we say "who says that the Chachum would check the Bechor" is because of the prohibition of checking it on Yom Tov, which doesn't apply to annulling a vow; still, perhaps the husband won't want to annul it so quick since the vow might be somehow strengthening a Mitzvah, and he doesn't want it to be annulled.] The Gemara answers: since the wife relies on her husband to annul her vows (he makes himself available to annul it), as we say; all women vow only with their husband's consent (i.e., to annul it if they feel that the vow shouldn't have been made).

116) This, that we allow a Chachum to uproot a vow on Shabbos and we don't say "who says that a Chachum will uproot it" since, if you don't have a Chachum, then any three regular men may annul it. [Tosfos says: even though they allow three regular people to permit a Bechor if you don't have a Chachum, that's only by an obvious blemish like a broken leg. However, even by an obvious blemish, we wouldn't allow on Shabbos because "who says you'll be able to get three regular men" since there is a prohibition to check the Bechor. However, there is no prohibition by uprooting a vow.]

117) That, which R' Shimon forbids moving a lit lamp on Shabbos, it's not because there is a chance that it might go out. After all, we see that R' Shimon allows dragging a chair or bench, although it might make a trench, since it's an unintended Melacha. And not only in that case that's only a rabbinic prohibition, since the digging is done in a strange way, but even by the light going out which is a Torah prohibition [Tosfos: if you need the wick scorched, or else R' Shimon would exempt it because it's a Melacha Shein Tzricha L'gufo] as we see R' Shimon allows garment merchants to wear their Shatnez wares to show their length as long as they don't intend to wear them to protect them from the elements.

Daf 47

118) Rather, the reason why R' Shimon forbids it is: the lamp, wick and oil are all Bosis to the flame. [Tosfos says: the reason we need to say that the oil is also Bosis to the flame or else the lamp wouldn't be Bosis either, since it's Bosis to both Muktza and non-MIuktza (since it holds the non-Muktza oil).]

119) [Tosfos says: the wick is a utensil, and that's the reason it would be permitted to move if it wasn't Bosis to the flame. We only forbid later a broken wick (that's not fit to light anymore), which has the status of a broken utensil that's Muktza like a pebble.]

120) If something is Bosis both to Muktza and non-Muktza, but the non-Muktza is not something important in that house (i.e., they're rich people who don't use such small quantity); it's Muktza. As we see: that only clothes that are fit for the rich (i.e., at least three Tefachim squared) are susceptible to Tumah for rich people, even though those that are fit for the poor (three fingers squared) are susceptible to Tumah for poor people. [Tosfos says: this is only regarding being susceptible to Tumas Medris (when a Zav sits on it) but there is a Gezeiras Hakasuv that a three fingers squared cloth is susceptible to Tumah of a corpse even if found in a garbage heap.]

121) If it's Bosis for Muktza and non-Muktza; you may move it. Therefore, you can move an incense pan because of the ash that's in it [Tosfos: that was burnt from Friday and is now designated to use to cover spit and other disgusting items] even though there is still unburnt wood inside it [Tosfos: even though it's somewhat an important item. Therefore, we couldn't just extrapolate it from what the Mishna says we can move a basket (of fruit) with a stone in it , since the stone doesn't have any importance.]

122) [Tosfos asks: in Beitza, the Gemara compares a cup that a non-Jew drank from to this incense pan; to suggest you can move the cup even though there is leftovers from the non-Jew's drink (which is Muktza, since the non-Jew drank from the wine and made it forbidden). However, how can you allow there since there is no non-Muktza item in the cup like there is in the pan (i.e., the ash)? Tosfos answers: since the leftover wine is worthless, the cup is not secondary to it, therefore, you can move the cup without anything else in it. However, since these pieces of wood have some importance, the pan would be secondary to it if it wasn't that there was another item that wasn't Muktza in it.]

123) Even though it's forbidden to move a lamp that has a broken wick in it despite having leftover oil in it too; we must say that this was taught in Galil. [Rashi explains that they were poor and they didn't have much linen, so the leftover linen wick is greater than the oil. However, Tosfos disagrees since, it seems, that they were rich, and had plenty of linen. Rather, they had such an abundance of oil that it wasn't considered much to them, and that's why the wick was considered that much greater than the oil.]

124) R' Abbah and R' Huna b. Chiya allow putting together a makeshift bed. R' Yehuda quotes Rav and Shmuel who say that you're Chayiv Chatos if you do. [Tosfos explains: R' Huna and R' Abba refer to putting it together loosely, and Rav and Shmuel refer to putting it together tightly. However, they must argue with R' Huna, for if you're Chayiv for tightening it, the rabbis wouldn't allow you to attach it loosely either. However, you can't be Chayiv for putting it together loosely, (although you're Chayov for building loosely) since you can't do the Melacha of building on utensils.] This is also a Tannaic argument. R' Shimon b. Gamliel permits it when it's loose and the Tanna Kama forbids it. if you nail it in, you're Chayiv Chatos.

125) The Tanna holds that you're Chayiv for replacing a reed in a Menorah, but exempt by adding reeds (to extend the handle) of a lime applicator (since it's meant to be constantly taken apart and rebuild to adjust the length). R' Simai says: if you replace the pieces of a circular musical instrument, since it needs a skilled worker to insert it, you're Chayiv if you did. However, if it's a straight instrument, and anyone can insert the pieces, you're exempt from a Chatos if you insert them.

126) you're allowed to put a utensil under a lamp to catch the falling sparks on Shabbos. You don't have the problem of making the utensil Muktza on Shabbos since sparks don't have any substance (to say that the utensil is Bosis to it).

127) However, it's forbidden to put water in a utensil and place it under the lamp even on Friday. This is not like R' Yossi's opinion who forbids causing extinguishing indirectly, since he only forbids placing water on Shabbos, but not on Friday, [Tosfos: and he only forbids when the house is on fire since he might become very nervous about losing his money, and if we allow him to get involved with ways to save the money, he'll make a rash decision to directly extinguish the fire, and that doesn't apply to our case.]

128) Rather, the reason it's forbidden since you're making the spark being close to extinguishing. [Tosfos explains: we decreed not to put the utensil out on Friday, since you might come to put it out on Shabbos, which is forbidden since you might put it out exactly when a spark is landing into it. Alternatively, you might come to pick up the utensil as the spark is falling to catch it, and you'll directly extinguish it. Even though R' Shimon considers this a Melacha Shein Tzricha L'gufo, they forbade it so that he shouldn't come to do a Torah prohibited extinguishing.

This is not similar to what we allow to do all Melachos on Friday even though it will continue into Shabbos. After all, there you know it to be a Melacha, and just because we permit you to do it on Friday, you won't come to do it on Shabbos. However, here, putting water underneath a lamp doesn't look like a Melacha. Therefore, if we allow it on Friday, they'll come to do it even on Shabbos. Although this seems like a double decree, we must say that they held to make a double decree in this instance.]

129) [R' Tam held that R' Chananel's text is correct: "since the extinguishing is close." (The item that will extinguish it {the water} is close {without separation}). This is forbidden even according to the Rabanan who argue with R' Yossi. After all, they only permit causing indirect extinguishing when you place the water in utensils, where you have the wall of the utensil separating between the water and the fire. However, they would agree that it's forbidden if there is no separation, like to make a wall of snow, or to have open water underneath the spark.

However, Tosfos disagrees. After all, the Yerushalmi says that our Mishna is R' Yossi, but the Rabanan permit with a wall of snow even without a separation. Also, we see by the case where a Talis is on fire, that you may spill liquid around the fire even though there is no separation. However, we can push off these proofs: first of all, perhaps our case of water is worse since the spark falls directly into the water, and doesn't need to travel like it does to the wall of snow. Also, perhaps the Bavli argues with the Yerushalmi. Also, perhaps the Talis case is no proof since you're only allowed to spill the liquid around the fire to prevent its spreading, not to extinguish it.]

130 [Tosfos says: you may put water in the glass lamps in order to lift the oil since it's not placed in it to extinguish the sparks. A proof to that is: you can definitely put in oil and you don't need to worry that the oil will put out the sparks either.]

Daf 36

1) A Kira, (i.e., a stove that is wide enough to place two pots on it, and the walls are straight); if it's fueled with hay and stubble, you may place a pot on it. If it's fueled with wood and compost, you may not place a pot on it unless you shovel out the coals or you cover them with ash. [Rashi explains: otherwise it adds heat, and we forbid insulating it in something that adds heat. Tosfos asks: even after the coals are shoveled, or covered with ash, it adds plenty of heat. Also, according to Chananya, you can leave it on the Kira without doing anything to the coals, even though it's adding heat, if it's cooked before Shabbos to the point where Ben Drusay would eat it (i.e., a half or third cooked). Rather, explains Tosfos: we only forbid insulating it by wrapping it up in something that adds heat, but that's not the problem by a Kira. Here, we're afraid that, if you don't shovel out or cover the coals, you'll come to stir them (to make the cooking go faster).]

2) Beis Shammai says that you may only leave hot water up, but not a stew. [Tosfos explains: this is even if the water is only cooked like Ben Drusoy would drink it, and it will improve when it continues cooking on Shabbos. Still; since there is a limit to how much more cooking will improve it, since it won't improve anymore after it's fully cooked, they allowed it. They only forbid a stew since it will be constantly improving even after it's fully cooked.] Beis Hillel says you may leave both hot water and stews on the Kira.

3) Beis Shammai says that you can't return it to the Kira after you took it off, and Beis Hillel permits returning it. [Tosfos quotes the Gemara later that this is also on Shabbos, which, he says; implies that the main problem of returning it is before Shabbos. Although, it's not probable to say that if you took it off in the morning you can't return it ever. Rather, if it cooled down, you can't return it unless you have enough time to reheat it before Shabbos. (However, regarding returning it on Shabbos, of course it's even forbidden when it's boiling hot). Alternatively, even when it's boiling hot, you can't return it unless there is enough time to reheat it before Shabbos if it cooled down.]

4) [Tosfos says: we allow you to return the pot on a Kira on Shabbos, although you're covering the airspace and making it like a tent. Although we forbid placing a pot on top of two barrels if you build it from bottom up, but only from top down (i.e., you must hold the pot in the air and then insert the barrels below it); that's because you're making the walls at the same time as the roof. However, here, the Kira walls were premade, so there's no problem placing something above it to make a roof unless it's truly being used as a roof. As we say that if you have sheep that need air at night and shade by day, when you roll up the canopy at night you need to leave a Tefach spread out so that, when you spread it all out the next day, you wouldn't be making a temporary tent, but just adding onto a started one.]

Daf 37

5) When Beis Hillel allows returning, it's only if you return it to the top of the Kira, but not within the Kira. [Rashi explains: even according to the opinion that you don't need to shovel or cover the coals when you leave it on before Shabbos, you can't put it inside the oven since it's insulating in something that adds heat. R' Chananel asks: this opinion allows putting a cake on coals as long as it formed a crust on Friday, and doesn't forbid because of insulating. Rather Tosfos explains: it refers to returning the pot on the stove, that the Rabanan felt to be stringent by returning, but you may leave the pot before Shabbos within the Kira since they weren't as stringent by it like they were by returning the pot.]

6) R' Meir says that Beis Hillel only allowed leaving hot water on the Kira, and R' Yehuda says that you may leave both hot water and a stew as long as the coals are shoveled or covered. Chananya allowed leaving it on the Kira without shoveling or covering the coals as long as it got to the point of when Ben Drusoy would eat it. [Tosfos points out that Rav's position is in between, that you only don't need to shovel out or cover the coals if it's completely cooked and the extra cooking is making it worse. R' Yochanan says that it's permitted in all cases where it's completely cooked. However, we don't find Tannaim who held those positions.]

7) [Tosfos explains the following Gemara: in a case you can't leave on a Kira, or when you can't return to the Kira; every opinion according to what they hold is forbidden] you may place the pot near the Kira. [Tosfos concludes: this doesn't prove that you may put it next to an open fire. Perhaps they only allowed it here where the walls of the Kira separate the pot from the fire.]

8) If the coals are starting to become dim, or you covered the coals with the small impurities combed out of flax; it's considered as if it's covered with ash. Also, if you covered the coals with ash; and the coals eventually reignited like they were originally, it still has the status as being covered with ash. [Tosfos, according to one answer: if it reignited well, it's not completely like if it's covered with ash; but you can only leave a pot on it that's completely cooked even if it's improved by the extra cooking, but not if it's not completely cooked.]

9) R' Sheishes quotes R' Yochanan that you may leave a stew that wasn't completely cooked before Shabbos on the Kira. [Tosfos says that R' Chananel Paskins like this, since Rava also holds this way. Rashi also Paskins this way since we have an unnamed Mishna in the first Perek that allows leaving a bread in the oven as long as it started forming a crust (but is not completely baked).]

10) However, R' Shimon b. Yehuda quotes R' Yochanan: it's only permitted if it's completely cooked, even if it's improving with the extra cooking. Rav and Shmuel only permit if the extra cooking is detrimental.

11) Any stew that contains flour, when it's fully cooked, the extra cooking is detrimental to it, except if it has turnips with meat and you don't need it for guests (and, therefore, you don't care that the meat is disintegrating), Also, any stew of dates, figs and cereal, the extra cooking is detrimental to them.

Daf 38

12) The Gemara concludes: if you forgot a pot on the stove and it continued cooking on Shabbos, they originally said that it should have the same Halacha as cooking on Shabbos, that it's forbidden if you did it on purpose, but it's permitted if done forgetfully. However, when they saw people purposely leaving it on, and claiming that they forgot; they decreed it to be forbidden even when left forgetfully. [Tosfos: that, which we Paskin like Chananya, it must refer to it not being cooked enough before Shabbos like Ben Drasoy would eat. Alternatively, you threw in a raw limb before Shabbos. Although we allow that in the first Perek (since it won't be ready for the night meal even with stirring, and it would be ready the next day without stirring); that was only by a Tanor (that has slanted walls and was better insulated and hotter), but not by a Kira which is more open to the air, and it may not be ready by morning and you might come to stir the coals.]

13) R' Meir permits B'dieved (if you placed it over the coals without shoveling or covering the coals) if the pot was cooked completely. R' Yehuda only permits it if the extra cooking is detrimental. Although R' Meir earlier only permits to put a pot on a stove when the extra cooking is detrimental, that's only what we permit L'chatchila, but B'dieved, it's permitted even if the cooking improves it. [Tosfos points out: although he didn't allow a cooked stew. Also, R' Meir only allowed hot water even if it is not cooked completely, and here he only allows if it's cooked completely; we need to give the same answer we'll give to R' Yehuda in the next entry: it's only permitted when it's not completely cooked when the coals are shoveled or covered, and here we don't permit it if it's not completely cooked since the coals weren't shoveled or covered.]

14) Although, R' Yehuda earlier permitted putting the pot on the stove if it's completely cooked even if the food is improving, that's because the coals were shoveled or covered. However, R' Yehuda here refers to when the coals weren't shoveled or covered. [Tosfos points out: we also need the above differentiation; that this also only refers to B'dieved. After all, R' Yehuda doesn't allow even putting hot water on L'chatchila if the coals weren't shoveled or covered.]

15) The Gemara has an unresolved inquiry: what happens if you're 'Over' (transgressed), and left it on the stove? [Tosfos says that it refers to a case that happened before the decree to forbid in all cases. whether left on purpose or by accident. Therefore, this, that R' Yehuda forbade even B'dieved if it's fully cooked and improving with the extra cooking; was that only if he purposely left it there, or even if he accidently left it there? However, after the decree, we always forbid if it was done accidently, for, perhaps he'll do it purposely (and just claim it to be an accident). However, Tosfos concludes that the language of the Gemara is difficult to this explanation. After all, the term 'Over' (transgressing) infers that we're asking on a case that he did it on purpose, and not that it was done forgetfully.]

16) You may return the pot to the stove even on Shabbos. [Rashi explains: not only Friday night, but even on Shabbos. Tosfos asks: if that's the explanation, the Gemara should have said "you can return it even on Shabbos day." Rather, Tosfos says the main explanation is as we explained in the beginning of the Perek: the main decree to prohibit returning is returning it on Erev Shabbos.]

17) There is an argument whether, in order to return a pot: do you need to have the pot still in your hands, or can you return it to the stove even if you placed it on the floor. According to the opinion that you need to still have it in your hands, there are two versions: the first one; it's only permitted if it's in your hands if you intended to return it. This implies that you can't return it if it's on the floor even if you intended to return it. The second version: it's only forbidden if you place it on the floor if you don't intend to return it. This implies that you may return it if it's still in your hands even if you didn't intend to return it.

18) There is also an inquiry whether, if it's placed on a bed or chair, or hung on a pole, if it has the status of placing it on the floor or not.

19) There is another unresolved inquiry: if you poured the pot's contents into another pot, could you return the contents in the new pot to the stove. [Tosfos explains: there is more of a chance you'll come to stir the coals since it cooled down. However, we permit insulating this second pot on Shabbos. (Since, usually, we're concern by insulating that you'll find the pot cold and you'll come to warm it up), however, when you pour it into a second pot, it got cooled down so much you won't be able to heat it up if you would now put it on the coals and stir; thus we don't worry that he'll come to stir the coals.]

20) However, this is the Halacha by a Kira, but by a Tanor (that its walls are slanted and is better insulated, and, therefore, hotter), you can't leave a pot in it, or on it, even if it's fueled with hay. However, a Kupach (that's built like a Kira, but only has room for one pot. Since it's narrower than a Kira, it's more hotter, but since its walls aren't slanted, it's cooler than a Tanor). If it's fueled with hay, then, it has the same Halacha as a Kira. If it's fueled with wood or compost; it has the same Halacha as a Tanor. [Tosfos explains: this is only for items that we need the coals shoveled out or covered by a Kira. However, items that don't need the coals shoveled or covered by a Kira, like you put in a raw limb right before Shabbos, or, according to the opinion that permits, after it's cooked enough that Ben Drusoy ate it; you're allowed to leave it on the Tanor and Kupach too.]

21) Abaya says that a Kupach is always permitted when its coals are shoveled out or covered; and is always forbidden when it's not (no matter how it's fueled). [Tosfos explains: that he holds, by a Kupach, there is no difference whether it's fueled by hay or by wood and compost once the coals were shoveled out or covered (since their heat is close enough to each other).] The only difference between the two if you could put the pot close to it from the outside of the stove. However, R' Ada b. Ahava holds that we refer here to the coals being shoveled out or covered, and yet you can't leave the pot on the Tanor, or on a Kupach that's fueled by wood and compost. [Tosfos explains: he holds that there is a distinctive difference between the heat of being fueled by hay or by wood and compost even after the coals are covered or shoveled out.]

22) We learned a Braisa like Abaya who holds that you can only place a pot near a Kupach that's fueled by hay and not by wood and compost. [However, Tosfos has a version that says that you may put the pot near the Kupach. If so, it must refer to a case where the coals were shoveled or covered.]

23) We already defined the Kira as being able to hold two pots, and a Kupach holds one pot. Therefore, if a Kira is broken in half, if it's to its length, it's no longer susceptible to Tumah since it can't be used anymore. However, if it's width is broken in half, they're still susceptible to Tumah because it's able to hold one pot. However, a Kupach that's broken in half, either in the length or width, it's no longer susceptible to Tumah.

24) It's forbidden to roast an egg slightly, and if you do, you're Chayiv a Chatos. This is like old salted fish and a spaniard mackerel, that you're Chayiv if you pour hot water on it since the pouring finishes its process.

Daf 39

25) Anything that was in hot water before Shabbos [Tosfos: i.e., it was completely cooked], you can soak it in hot water on Shabbos, since there is no Melacha of cooking after it was already cooked once. However if it wasn't cooked before Shabbos, then you can't soak it in hot water, but you may pour hot water over it with the exceptions of an old salted fish and a spaniard mackerel. [Tosfos explains: this fits well according to the Rashba who holds that hot water poured from a Kli Rishon has the status of a Kli Sheini, and that's why it doesn't cook. However, it doesn't fit well to R' Tam who says that it has the status of a Kli Rishon, because then you shouldn't be able to pour the hot water over it because it will cook it a little bit. Therefore, we must explain that you may only pour hot water on it from a Kli Sheini. That, which we don't say that you can permit soaking it in a Kli Sheini is because the rabbis forbade it. Granted that it can't cook, but since it's boiling hot, it seems like you're cooking inside it. Although they allowed placing spices in a Kli Sheini, that's because it doesn't look like you're trying to cook the spices, but just to season your food. Alternatively, they allowed even to soak the raw food in a Kli Sheini. The only reason they said you may pour from a Kli Sheini onto the food is to parallel that you can't even pour hot water from a Kli Sheini on old salted fish and a spaniard mackerel since it finishes its process.]

26) Everyone holds that there is no prohibition to cook in the sun, and there is a prohibition to cook over an item that was heated by fire. However, the Chachumim forbade cracking an egg over a hankerchief heated up in the sun and R' Yossi permits it. As the Chachumim hold that they forbade cooking on an item heated up from the sun since you'll come to confuse it with an item heated up by fire, and that's prohibited from the Torah. However, R' Yossi didn't make such a decree.

27) However, everyone agrees that you can't bury it in sand that's heated from the sun. [Tosfos explains: although we say in Bava Basra that sand keeps cold items cold, and here the egg was originally cold; that only refers to cold sand, but here we refer to heated sand.]

28) The reason why R' Yossi doesn't argue with this case: Rabbah says it's a separate decree maybe you'll come to wrap it in hot ash with embers (and will come to stir). [Tosfos explains why this decree doesn't apply to wrapping it in a hot handkerchief: because it's not so similar to hot ash like sand is. Also, you don't need to worry that he'll come to cook it in a handkerchief that was heated by fire, since it's not so common to be heated by fire since it will burn.] R' Yosef says that it's a decree that you'll come to move the sand. [Rashi says: we're afraid that there won't be enough sand to bury the egg, and you'll come to dig in the sand. Tosfos explains; we must refer to digging in the sand to make a place for the egg. After all, if it's only digging sand to wrap it in, and you're not using the hole, then you're not Chayiv from the Torah (according to R' Shimon who says a Melacah Shein Tzricha L'gufo is exempt, and you don't need the hole here), and you can't make a decree to forbid burying the egg in sand because you might come to transgress a rabbinical digging. R' Tam explains: the problem is Muktza, that you'll be moving the sand. Alternatively, R' Tam explains: when you stick the egg in the ground, it would push the sand to the side and will make a hole, and you'll be Chayiv for digging a hole. Rabbah didn't want to explain like that since he holds you're only Chayiv for digging when you scoop out dirt, but not by sticking an object in the ground that pushes aside the dirt.[

29) The practical difference between Rabbah and R' Yosef's explanation: if it's loose dirt. [Rashi says: digging does apply to it, but you still need to worry that you'll come to insulate it in ash. Tosfos asks: the Gemara in Beiza says that there is digging in loose dirt. Tosfos answers: there, it refers to a case where the loose dirt is surrounded by packed dirt; and when you remove the loose dirt, there remains a hole. However, here, it's all loose dirt, and when you remove the dirt, the hole will collapse, it's not considered as if you made a hole.]

30) it's permitted to roll an egg on a roof, since it's not applicable to say that you might come to insulate it in ash. [R' Tam asks on Rashi who says the reason of the decree not to put an egg in the sand is that you might come to dig into the sand: why are you not worried that they'll dig in the roof's clay (that holds the ceiling boards together) in order to insulate.]

31) [R' Yosef doesn't decree here that, if you bury it in hot sand, you'll come to insulate it in hot ash. We only worry about that when you have a cooked item insulated, but not if it's raw and cooking in sand that's heated by the sun. After all, you won't be confused and think that you also may cook inside hot ash that's from fire. Even the prohibition to insulate it with something that doesn't add heat on Shabbos is only by something cooked that you'll come to reheat it, but you won't make a mistake to cook it on a fire in the first place.]

32) The people of Teveria placed a pipe of cold water into the hotspring, and the Chachumim forbade it, and forbade using the water. [Rashi says that they pumped in water into the hotspring. Although the water was placed in on Friday; still, they decreed it to be forbidden perhaps you'll put it in on Shabbos, and they enacted to forbid putting in water that's heated by the sun on Shabbos for, perhaps, you'll come to put it in water heated by fire. Tosfos says: although it seems like a double decree (that we usually don't enact), we must say that they considered it to be one big decree. Alternatively, that they needed to open up the pipes on Shabbos for the water to come in. However, Tosfos doesn't agree to this explanation, because we'll compare it to insulating, and pumping in water is not similar to insulating. Rather, Tosfos explains: they ran a pipe all through the hotspring and out the other side, because the hotspring water smelled, so it couldn't be used, so they wanted it to heat up the water in the pipes to have hot clean water.] The Gemara asks: this fits well to Rabbah why R' Yossi would agree to this, since it's similar to insulating. However, why would he agree to it according to R' Yosef? The Gemara answers: R' Yosef holds that R' Yossi could explain that the hotsprings of Teveria are heated by fire, since it's heated as it passes the opening of Gehenim.

33) We learn from the people of Teveria that the rabbis prohibit any insulating in something that adds heat even if you insulated it on Friday. [Tosfos asks: we don't need this story as a proof, since a Mishna forbids it. That Mishna must be referring to forbidding it on Friday, since, on Shabbos, it's anyhow forbidden to insulate even in material that doesn't add heat. Tosfos answers: we could have explained that the Mishna only forbids Bein Hashmashes (which is permitted if it doesn't add heat), so we're taught that it's even forbidden during Friday. Although the Mishna talks about insulating in Muktza items (so it must be referring to Friday, because Muktza is forbidden Bein Hashmashes; so we answer:no, it refers to Bein Hashmashes) and we can say that the author is Rebbi who allows rabbinical Shabbos prohibitions during Bein Hashmashes, (and he could move the Muktza items Bein Hashmashses. The exception is that they were stringent by this prohibition to insulate, although it's only a rabbinical prohibition, they forbade it Bein Hashmashes).

R' Shmuel from Viridin answers: the Chidush here is that, even if it was B'dieved done, the rabbis forbade to drink from it. R' Yona answers: that the Chiddush here is; it's forbidden even if it was completely uncooked right before Shabbos, (which, by leaving a pot on the stove, is allowed ).]

34) it's forbidden to wash yourself even with water heated on Friday, except for your face, hands and feet.

35) Regarding washing with cook water on Yom Tov: Beis Shammai holds that it's forbidden unless you cook water that's fit to drink. [Tosfos adds: and it also needs to be heated to drink, because Beis Shammai forbids doing any Melacha that's not for eating since he doesn't hold of the idea of; "once the Torah permits that Melacha for eating, it permits it completely for any reason." However, once you're cooking it to drink, it's permitted to add water to wash. This is similar to what we say in Eiruvin; if you need to heat up water for the mother who gave birth, (if it would be dangerous for her to be without), you may add water to wash the Mila. However, this is only for what's needed to wash your feet, but not for your whole body, since it's forbidden to wash it on Yom Tov. The reason why we forbid washing on Yom Tov since the bathhouse attendants were suspected to heat up the bath on Yom Tov. Although, according to what we just said, it's permitted as long as he also intended to drink; they're suspected to heat up only for the bath.]

36) Beis Hillel permits heating the water on Yom Tov to wash his face, hands and feet. [However, not for the whole body, since it's just an excessive pleasure that not everyone appreciates (which is not allowed on Yom Tov). However, heating up a bathhouse in order to induce sweating (the Shvitz) is really appreciated by all and should be permitted on Yom Tov, but they enacted to forbid it because people came to wash there (and just claimed that they came to sweat).]

37) R' Meir forbade someone to pour water over himself, whether it's cold or hot water. R' Shimon permitted both. R' Yehuda only permitted cold water, but not hot water. However, this is only when the water is held in the ground (and you unplug a hole to allow the water to flow on you). However, if the water is in vessels, he can't pour it over himself in any case. [Tosfos says: although R' Meir allows bathing in cold water in the river; that's because he only forbids by containments in the ground that look like vessels, that looks like heated water. However, rivers don't look like they're being heated, so it's permitted. He even allows bathing in the hotsprings of Teveria despite being hot, since it's not similar to regular washing in heated water.]

38) The Halacha is like R' Yehuda. [Although there is an unnamed Mishna not like him, since they have an argument in a Braisa, plus that he's the middle opinion, tells us to Paskin like him. (However, we wouldn't Paskin against an unnamed Mishna just because there is an argument in the Braisa without any other factor.] We always Paskin like the middle opinion.

[Tosfos brings another Gemara says that the exception is that we don't Paskin like a middle opinion that's a third. One explanation is: it's an opinion that just happens to be in the middle, however, the extreme opinions didn't mention the variables, like R' Meir and R' Shimon did, as they mention in their opinion "whether hot or cold." That way they admitted that there is logic to differentiate between them. However, if they don't mention any variable, it shows that they don't consider that there is any logic to differentiate. Alternatively, if the middle opinion is from a later generation, like in the case of the Gemara, the middle opinion was a third generation from the authorities that held the extreme positions; we don't Paskin like him.]

39) R' Yehuda says that R' Akiva and R' Elazar b. Azarya had water poured on them when the hot water was covered with boards. However the Chachuim say that you don't need to cover the boards. [Rashi says that you need the boards covered so that you don't need to suspect them that they used hot water that was cooked on Shabbos. Tosfos asks: didn't R' Yehuda forbid having hot water poured on you on Shabbos? He says: perhaps we need to differentiate between Shabbos and Yom Tov. However, the Tosefta explained that they poured cold water, and they covered the hot waters with boards not to be suspected that they used hot water.]

Daf 40

40) Shmuel says that you can't wash on Shabbos and Yom Tov except for your face, hands and feet. The first version of Rav's opinion is that you could wash your whole body one limb at a time, and the second version is that he allows washing his whole body at once except for one limb. However, there is a Braisa that supports Shmuel's opinion.

41) They decreed not to wash in hot water because of the bathhouse attendants who heated up the water on Shabbos and claimed that it was heated up before Shabbos. When people would go to the bathhouse and wash themselves and claim that they only went to sweat; they decreed a prohibition to sweat on Shabbos and Yom Tov. They decreed afterwards to forbid washing in the hotsprings of Teveria since people claimed that they washed in the hotsprings when they really washed in a bathhouse. However, since they realized that it's a decree that the people wouldn't be able to uphold, they rescinded the decree.

42) Anyone who transgresses a rabbinical decree, you can call him a transgressor of sins.

43) You can go through bathhouses of big cities, since they're big houses, the heat is not so concentrated, and you may not come to sweat while you walk through it. However, you can't go through a bathhouse of a small city since it's so small, it's much hotter in there and you will definitely come to sweat there.

44) You can warm yourself next to a fireplace on Shabbos and then pour cold water over you; but you can't pour water and then warm yourself by the fireplace so that the water becomes warm. [Tosfos explains: the problem is not cooking the water, since we say later that warming water is not considered cooking. Rather, it's a problem that you're bathing on Shabbos in warm water.]

45) You may heat up a towel and put it upon your bowels, but you can't take a pot of hot water and place it there. [Rashi explains: it might spill and you'll be bathing in hot water on Shabbos. Tosfos explains: you can't place it on the towel since it might spill and you'll come to squeeze out the towel. Alternatively, it's forbidden even without a towel, since it's obvious that it's for a medicinal purpose, which is prohibited on Shabbos since you might come to grind up herbs. However, the heated towel alone is not as obvious that it's done for a medicinal purpose.] This is even forbidden during the week since it's dangerous.

46) The Tanna Kama holds that you may place cold water next to a fireplace in order to remove its chill, but not to heat it up, since warming it up is not cooking. R' Yehuda says that the same applies to oil since warming oil up is not cooking either. R' Shimon b. Gamliel allows smearing the oil on his hands and then warming it up. He holds that warming oil is cooking it, so he only allows it when doing in a strange fashion (which the Torah never forbids by Melachos).

(The Tanna Kama doesn't state his position explicitly regarding oil.) Rabbah and R' Yosef says that the Tanna Kama allows leaving oil by the fire to heat up since there is no concept of cooking by oil. R' Nachman b. Yitzchok says the opposite. He says you can't even warm it up, since warming is it's cooking, and he's even more stringent than R' Shimon b. Gamliel since he doesn't even allow doing it in a strange way.

47) The Gemara's conclusion is that Shmuel forbade by both oil and water if it gets hot enough that he would automatically remove his hands from it when touched. (Since not all hands are the same and some tolerate heat more, to give a more universal measurement), it's the amount that will scald a baby's stomach.

48) Rebbi forbade placing oil in a Kli Rishon of a bath, like some basin, since you can cook oil, and warming it up is considered cooking it. Therefore, he said to first place the water in a Kli Sheini before putting in the oil, since a Kli Sheini can't cook. [Tosfos says: this is even if it's still hot enough to make you automatically remove your hand when touched, since the walls of the utensil cools off the water, and it's constantly becoming cooler after that.]

49) This, that Rebbi gave this order in the bathhouse even though it's forbidden to speak Torah there [Tosfos and it's even forbidden to think Torah there]; since he needed to prevent someone from sinning. This is the same reason why R' Meir told someone in a bathhouse not to wash the floor, or smear the floor with oil (to roll over); since you might come to level holes in the ground.

50) Although Rebbi lived after they enacted a decree not to bathe on Shabbos, that which he was at a bathhouse on Shabbos, he must have been by the hotsprings of Teveria that's still permitted. Although there is no Torah prohibition to cook in the hotspring; it's rabbinically forbidden, and one gets rabbinical lashes for cooking there.

51) You're not allowed to swim in a stream on Shabbos [Rashi: since you might move the water four Amos in a Karmulas], even if it's situated in your courtyard [and don't have the above problem]. Still R' Zeira had a doubt that R' Avohu might have lifted his feet (to swim) while he was in the bathhouse since it has ledges surrounding the water, it's more similar to being in a vessel than being in a stream and, maybe, they didn't enact to forbid it.

Daf 41

52) Even though R' Eliezer held that you can't hold your male appendage when urinating since it's like you brought a Mabul to the world (since it might make you emit semen) [and even the Rabanan only argue and allow is when you urinate since you need to prevent the urine from splashing over you're legs so people don't say that your children are not yours, that the urine splashed since your appendage is cut in a way that you can't have children. However, they agree to R' Eliezer that you can't hold it regularly.] R' Zeira was in doubt if R' Avohu touched it when he was covering it coming out of the river. That's because, perhaps, the fear of the river prevented him from having bad thoughts as he touched it. After all, we see this concept; if non-Jewish looters come to a town; when the world is at peace (and they don't fear anybody); all open barrels are forbidden since they might have used it for libations. However, if it's during a war, the barrels are permitted. Since they fear the ongoing war, they don't have time to use it as libations.

53) However, it's only permitted to cover his Ervah when he comes up from the river and is facing people, but not when he descends into the river since he looks like he's embarrassed by his Bris and he's trying to deny the Bris of Avraham Avinu.

54) You're allowed to say mundane speech in the bathhouse, even if spoken in Lashon Hakodesh.

55) You may drink from a urn called a 'Molier' that has its coals in a side compartment. however, it's forbidden from the Antachi urn, even if the urn is shoveled out. There is an argument whether it's only by a thick walled one that has a fire going constantly (since it's well insulated it won't cool at all). Or, it's even forbidden as long as the coals are on the bottom. We have a Braisa that defines it as having the coals on the bottom.

56) [Rashi explains that an Antachi is forbidden since it adds heat. Tosfos disagrees, since we only forbid when it adds heat by insulating, not by leaving a pot on coals. Also, it's not probable that the Mishna refers to a case where someone transgressed a prohibition. Also, according to those who hold that our Mishna holds of Chananya, you may leave food on a stove without shoveling out the coals. Also, if our Mishna forbids drinking from water that was left on their heating source in a prohibited way; how can Rabbah and R' Yosef think that a pot left on a stove is permitted, and we needed to disprove them from a Braisa? After all, this Mishna forbids it. Rather, Tosfos explains: we're referring to mixing this hot water with wine to dilute it. The Molier's water is not so hot, so you can dilute the wine with it since it won't cook the wine. However, the Antochi's water is very hot, and if you use it to dilute the wine, it would cook the wine.]

57) A pot that was emptied from its water, you can't pour a little bit of cold water in it to cook. R' Yehuda says that you may not pour in a lot of water either, since it may strengthen the pot, (which is a type of fixing of the utensil). R' Shimon permits since he holds that you're allowed to do an unintended Melacha. [Tosfos explains: we must say that it's not definite that it will strengthen the pot, or else it would be a P'sik Reisha, which R' Shimon agrees that it's forbidden. Rashi in Yuma who says the reason that R' Yehuda allowed putting the heated metal in the Kohain Gadol's Mikva to warm it up, although it's strengthening the metal; since this form of strengthening metal is only forbidden rabbinically, and R' Yehuda only forbids unintended Torah Melachos, and not rabbinical prohibitions. Tosfos asks on him: in our Gemara, R' Yehuda forbids an unintended strengthening of the metal. Also, he forbids dragging a bed on the ground since he'll make an unintended trench, although it's only forbidden rabbinically, since it's made in a strange way.

Rather, Tosfos explains: really, R' Yehuda only rabbinically forbids unintended Melachos on Shabbos. Although he holds it's forbidden from the Torah by other prohibitions, Shabbos is different since the Torah requires "thoughtful/important Melachos" Therefore, they allowed them to do it in the Mikdash, since they didn't forbid rabbinical Shabbos prohibitions there.]

58) [Tosfos asks on his explanation: we see that R' Yehuda says that one is Chayiv two Chatos for stirring coals, one for extinguishing some coals even though it's unintended, and one for kindling some coals, even though you have enough heat by just uncovering the coals that are lit now, since he's Chayiv for a Melacha Shein Tzricha L'gufo. So, we see that R' Yehuda holds that you're Chayiv for an unintended Melacha on Shabbos.

Tosfos answers: since it's a P'sik Reisha, unavoidable and inevitable, it's really a Melacha Shein Tzricha L'gufo. The reason why we call it unintended, is because you want the heat, so you don't want to extinguish coals. Therefore, we don't call the kindling unintended even if it's not needed, since it produces heat and you want the heat, even if it's not necessary. R' Shimon exempts him because he exempts a Melacha Shein Tzricha L'gufo since you don't need the heat the kindling provides.]

59) If you didn't empty the water from the pot, everyone holds that you may add a lot of water. Rav says that we only allow to por in the amount of water needed to get it warm, but not the amount that can strengthen the pot, since he holds like R' Yehuda that prohibits unintended Melachos. Shmuel held like R' Shimon and permitted even if you added enough water that it can strengthen the pot. [Rashi says: it only applies strengthening when the water is empty and only if it's filled over the rim. Tosfos says: this is a pushed explanation. Ri says that strengthening always applies when you empty the pot, as we asked that R' Yehuda forbids pouring water into the pot, and we didn't answer that he allows it when he doesn't fill it all the way. Therefore, if the pot is empty, you can strengthen it with any amount of water. If there is still hot water in the pot, you can only strengthen it when you fill it over the rim.]

Daf 42

60) Even though Shmuel holds like R' Shimon regarding unintended Melachos, but holds like R' Yehuda regarding Melacha Shein Tzricha L'gufo. Therefore, since we have a rule that you may transgress a rabbinical prohibition so people won't get damaged; you may extinguish a very hot piece of metal in a street so someone shouldn't step on it (since it's only a rabbinical prohibition to extinguish it) but you can't extinguish a wooden coal (even though you don't need it to be extinguished, it's still a Melacha. However, R' Shimon holds you may extinguish it since it's only rabbinically forbidden because it's a Melacha Shein Tzricha L'gufo, since you don't need an extinguished piece of wood.)

61) Therefore, Raveina says: if you find a thorn in a Reshus Harabim, you may remove it by carrying it less than four Amos at a time (which is only rabbinically forbidden). However, you may carry it away in a Karmulas without stopping.

62) Beis Shammai says that you may pour hot water into cold, but not cold water into hot. [Tosfos explains: it implies whatever you pour from is a smaller amount of water than what you pour into. Therefore, you can pour a small amount of hot water, even from a Kli Rishon, into a lot of cold water since it won't cook since the heat will dissipate in the large amount of cold water. However, you can't pour a little bit of cold water in a lot of hot water because it will cook it, and according to Beis Shammai, even if it's in a Kli Sheini. He held to decree to forbid a Kli Sheini since you might come to use a Kli Rishon.] Beis Hillel permits pouring it into a cup (which is a Kli Sheini), but not in a bathhouse utensil. [Tosfos explains: even though it's a Kli Sheini, since we're comparing it to a cup. Also, if the Mishna wants to differentiate between a Kli Rishon and Kli Sheini, it should have used a urn as an example, since it's similar to a cup that both waters are made to drink. Rather, it's a Kli Sheini, but since water cooked for bathing is exceedingly hot, people will confuse it with a Kli Rishon, so the rabbis decreed to forbid.] R' Shimon b. Menasya forbids mixing the bathhouse water even if you pour the hot water into the cold.

63) The Gemara's conclusion is that a basin is not like the above bathhouse utensil, and therefore, this is what people use to wash their face and hands on Shabbos, [Tosfos adds: and it's even permitted to pour the cold water into the hot.]

64) You don't put spices in a Kli Rishon, but you may put it in a Kli Sheini. R' Yehuda allows [Tosfos qualifies: spices] in a Kli Rishon unless the stew contains vinegar or brine. [However, he'll agree that you can't put other foods in a Kli Rishon that's removed from the fire.]

65) [Tosfos says: regarding pouring hot water on spices (Iroy Kli Rishon); R' Shmuel says that the water is a Kli Sheini since we Paskin that we consider it the have the status like the bottom, and the bottom is cold. Ri says that it's not like a Kli Rishon or Sheini (but something in between), and cooks the top peel's worth of the bottom piece. After all, we see this by pouring Issur, that it forbids the top peel's worth of the bottom piece. We also see in Zevachim that if you pour hot Kodshim into a utensil, it makes the utensil forbidden to use (since it absorbs some of the Kodshim). We also see that the Gemara in Avoda Zara says that, if you're making Hagala on a cauldron, you need to surround the rim with dough (to keep all water in the utensil). Even though, by this Hagala, it's only filled to the rim, and sometimes, when cooking, some drops jump from the pot onto the top of the rim; but since it only absorbed from drops, the drops that jumps out from the Hagala pot onto the top of the rim will permit it. [R' Akiva Eiger asks: how is this a proof to our case, which is hot on cold, since this refers to the hot drips on a hot utensil?]

Therefore Tosfos concludes: you shouldn't do Hagala through pouring hot water unless the utensil only absorbed by poured Issur. After all, we say the same way the absorptions come in, the absorptions are purged. Although the Gemara in Avoda Zara says that you can do Hagala on a wine vat (that had non-Jewish wine in it) by pouring hot water into it; that's because it didn't absorb Issur through heat (but just having the wine soaking in it cold for over twenty-four hours.]

66) There are two versions of R' Chiya's Braisa: if salt can be cooked even in a Kli Sheini or it can't be cooked even in a Kli Rishon. The last version agrees with R' Nachman who says that salt needs a lot of cooking like bull meat (that can only cook on the flame). [Therefore, even if you regularly hold that you follow the first version, or like the stringent version, here we'll Paskin like the second version since it agrees with R' Nachman. Therefore, you may put salt in a Kli Rishon once it's removed from the fire. However, if someone is careful to do like the first version and don't put salt in a Kli Sheini while it's hot enough for you to automatically remove your hand when touched, you will receive a blessing (from heaven).]