According to the braaisa on 38b, R Yehuda clearly holds that it is osur to do shehiya with a Tavshil that is Mitztamek v'Yafeh Lo when the the kira is not goruf vkotum. We also said on 38a that the author of the mishna is R Yehuda if we are not learning like Chananiah.
If so, which tanna do the amoraim on 38b hold like when they say that Mitztamek v'Yafeh Lo is mutar when the the kira is not goruf vkotum?
Thank you very much!
Yehudah Liknaitzky, Johannesburg, South Africa
You asked which Tana "do the Amora'im on 38b hold like," when you actually mean to say "the Amora'im on 37b." This refers to Rav Sheshes in the name of Rebbi Yochanan, who permits placing a Tavshil which is not fully cooked on the Kirah even if it is not Garuf v'Katum. Similarly, Rav Shmuel bar Yehudah in the name of Rebbi Yochanan allows placing a fully-cooked Tavshil on the Kirah even though it is Mitztamek v'Yafeh Lo. Rav Shmuel did not stipulate that the Kirah must be Garuf.
So the question is: Which Tana do Rav Shehses and Rav Shmuel bar Yehudah follow?
2) This question is in fact asked by Tosfos 37a, at the end of DH Iy Amrat Bishleima.
3) The Tosfos ha'Rosh, on the above Tosfos, writes that we also find that Rav does not agree with any Tana, but this is not surprising because we find the same phenomenon with Rebbi Yochanan. The Tosfos ha'Rosh writes that Rebbi Yochanan holds like Chananyah, that one may place the pot on the Kirah even though it is not Garuf v'Katum, but according to Rav Shmuel bar Yehudah, Rebbi Yochanan is Machmir more than Chananyah and requires that the Tavshil be fully cooked.
Dovid Bloom