Subscribe
Daily Daf Dose
1. Rav Yosef maintains that the reason Bais Hillel posits that an egg that was laid on Yom Tov may not be eaten is because the egg is similar to a case of fruit that fell off a tree on Yom Tov. If we would permit the egg to be eaten, people would think that it is permitted to eat the fruit that fell off a tree on Yom Tov The reason one cannot eat the fruit that fell from the tree on Yom Tov is because if the fruits that fell from the tree would be permitted, one might climb the tree and pick the fruit, which is a violation of the act of reaping, a biblically prohibited melacha. Rav Yitzchak disagrees with Rav Yosef’s comparison of the egg to the fruit because an egg is contained within the hen whereas a fruit is in the open, so an egg is not included in the decree of fruit that falls on Yom Tov.
...Read more
2. Rav Yitzchak explains the reasoning of Bais Hillel to mean that Bais Hillel does not permit one to eat the egg that was laid on Yom Tov because it resembles juices that flow from a fruit on Yom Tov. If one were allowed to eat the egg, he would come to drink the juice that flowed from the fruit, and this is prohibited lest one come to squeeze the fruit. Rav Yosef disagrees with the opinion of Rav Yitzchak who maintains that Bais Hillel prohibits one to eat an egg that was laid on Yom Tov because of the concern that otherwise one will permit juices that flowed on Yom Tov. There is no similarity as eggs and fruits are food whereas juice is not a food but a liquid.
3. There is a contradiction between two rulings of Rabi Yehudah. The Mishnah in Shabbos states that the Chachamim maintain that one cannot squeeze fruits on Shabbos with the intention of using the juice and even if the juice flowed out by itself one would not be allowed to use the juice. Rabbi Yehudah maintains that if one intended to eat the fruit, then the juice is permitted as he does not want the juice and therefore there is no concern that he will come to squeeze the fruit. If the fruit was intended to be used for the juice, however, then one is prohibited from drinking the juice that flowed from them. This ruling of Rabbi Yehudah indicates that anything that is extracted from food is deemed to be food and is not included in the decree on account of juice that flows from the fruit. Yet, Rabbi Yehudah himself opines elsewhere that an egg that was laid on the first day of Rosh HaShanah can be eaten on the second day of Rosh HaShanah, and this ruling implies that according to Rabbi Yehudah, the egg can only be eaten on the second day of Rosh HaShanah and not the first. This ruling contradicts the previous ruling of Rabbi Yehudah, as this ruling implies that any item that flows from its place of growth on Yom Tov, even if the item is a food, it is forbidden on account of the decree of juices that flow from a fruit. Rabbi Yochanan answers that the opinions in the Mishna of Shabbos should be reversed, with the stringent opinion being attributed to Rabbi Yehudah, and Rabbi Yehudah always follows the principle of issuing a decree on account of juice flowing from the fruit. Ravina answers that in the second Mishnah, Rabbi Yehudah was merely stating that his opinion is that the egg that was laid on the first day of Rosh HaShanah should be permitted on the first day also, but according to the Chachamim who prohibit one from eating the egg even on the second day of Rosh HaSshanah, they should at least admit that the egg is permitted to be eaten on the second day The reason Rabbi Yehudah felt that the Chachamim disagree with him regarding the second day is because Rabbi Yehudah posits that both days of Rosh HaShanah are holy because of an uncertainty, whereas the Chachamim maintain that the egg is prohibited on the second day also because both days are one continuous day of holiness. Ravina the son of Rav Ulla answers that the Mishna that discuses the egg that was laid on Rosh HaShanah refers to a hen which was designated to produce eggs and Rabbi Yehudah maintains that there is a prohibition of muktzeh, thus resulting in the prohibition of eating the egg on the first day of Rosh HaShanah.
4. The Gemara cites a Baraisa that rules that when there is a doubt, one is not permitted to eat the egg. The Gemara assumes that the doubt is where the egg was laid on Yom Tov or prior to Yom Tov. According to Rabbah, who maintains that an egg that is laid on Yom Tov is prohibited because of the principle of hachanah, i.e. preparation, then we can understand why the Baraisa rules that in a case of doubt the egg is prohibited. This is because the principle of hachanah is biblical in nature and we always rule stringently regarding biblical uncertainties. According to Rav Yosef and Rav Yitzchak, however, who maintain that one is prohibited from eating the egg because of a rabbinical decree, we rule leniently regarding uncertainty pertaining to a rabbinical decree, so the egg should be permitted in a case of uncertainty. The Gemara answers that the Baraisa refers to a doubt whether the hen was a treifa, which is a physical injury on an animal or on a bird that renders the animal biblically forbidden, and for this reason the egg is prohibited.
5. The Baraisa continues by stating that if the egg in doubt became mixed up with other eggs, all the eggs are prohibited. The Gemara asks that it is understandable why all the eggs are prohibited if the doubt was whether the egg had been laid on Yom Tov or during the week, because since the egg will be permitted after Yom Tov, there is a principle that any item that will eventually become permitted is not nullified even when intermingled with a thousand items of its like. If, however, the uncertainty is whether the egg that was laid came from a treifa hen, then the egg will never be permitted and the egg should be nullified in the mixture by the majority of eggs that are permitted. The Gemara attempts to answer that the Baraisa is in accordance with the opinion that maintains that any item which is counted and thus sold individually is deemed to be significant and cannot be nullified.
...Read more
2. Rav Yitzchak explains the reasoning of Bais Hillel to mean that Bais Hillel does not permit one to eat the egg that was laid on Yom Tov because it resembles juices that flow from a fruit on Yom Tov. If one were allowed to eat the egg, he would come to drink the juice that flowed from the fruit, and this is prohibited lest one come to squeeze the fruit. Rav Yosef disagrees with the opinion of Rav Yitzchak who maintains that Bais Hillel prohibits one to eat an egg that was laid on Yom Tov because of the concern that otherwise one will permit juices that flowed on Yom Tov. There is no similarity as eggs and fruits are food whereas juice is not a food but a liquid.
3. There is a contradiction between two rulings of Rabi Yehudah. The Mishnah in Shabbos states that the Chachamim maintain that one cannot squeeze fruits on Shabbos with the intention of using the juice and even if the juice flowed out by itself one would not be allowed to use the juice. Rabbi Yehudah maintains that if one intended to eat the fruit, then the juice is permitted as he does not want the juice and therefore there is no concern that he will come to squeeze the fruit. If the fruit was intended to be used for the juice, however, then one is prohibited from drinking the juice that flowed from them. This ruling of Rabbi Yehudah indicates that anything that is extracted from food is deemed to be food and is not included in the decree on account of juice that flows from the fruit. Yet, Rabbi Yehudah himself opines elsewhere that an egg that was laid on the first day of Rosh HaShanah can be eaten on the second day of Rosh HaShanah, and this ruling implies that according to Rabbi Yehudah, the egg can only be eaten on the second day of Rosh HaShanah and not the first. This ruling contradicts the previous ruling of Rabbi Yehudah, as this ruling implies that any item that flows from its place of growth on Yom Tov, even if the item is a food, it is forbidden on account of the decree of juices that flow from a fruit. Rabbi Yochanan answers that the opinions in the Mishna of Shabbos should be reversed, with the stringent opinion being attributed to Rabbi Yehudah, and Rabbi Yehudah always follows the principle of issuing a decree on account of juice flowing from the fruit. Ravina answers that in the second Mishnah, Rabbi Yehudah was merely stating that his opinion is that the egg that was laid on the first day of Rosh HaShanah should be permitted on the first day also, but according to the Chachamim who prohibit one from eating the egg even on the second day of Rosh HaSshanah, they should at least admit that the egg is permitted to be eaten on the second day The reason Rabbi Yehudah felt that the Chachamim disagree with him regarding the second day is because Rabbi Yehudah posits that both days of Rosh HaShanah are holy because of an uncertainty, whereas the Chachamim maintain that the egg is prohibited on the second day also because both days are one continuous day of holiness. Ravina the son of Rav Ulla answers that the Mishna that discuses the egg that was laid on Rosh HaShanah refers to a hen which was designated to produce eggs and Rabbi Yehudah maintains that there is a prohibition of muktzeh, thus resulting in the prohibition of eating the egg on the first day of Rosh HaShanah.
4. The Gemara cites a Baraisa that rules that when there is a doubt, one is not permitted to eat the egg. The Gemara assumes that the doubt is where the egg was laid on Yom Tov or prior to Yom Tov. According to Rabbah, who maintains that an egg that is laid on Yom Tov is prohibited because of the principle of hachanah, i.e. preparation, then we can understand why the Baraisa rules that in a case of doubt the egg is prohibited. This is because the principle of hachanah is biblical in nature and we always rule stringently regarding biblical uncertainties. According to Rav Yosef and Rav Yitzchak, however, who maintain that one is prohibited from eating the egg because of a rabbinical decree, we rule leniently regarding uncertainty pertaining to a rabbinical decree, so the egg should be permitted in a case of uncertainty. The Gemara answers that the Baraisa refers to a doubt whether the hen was a treifa, which is a physical injury on an animal or on a bird that renders the animal biblically forbidden, and for this reason the egg is prohibited.
5. The Baraisa continues by stating that if the egg in doubt became mixed up with other eggs, all the eggs are prohibited. The Gemara asks that it is understandable why all the eggs are prohibited if the doubt was whether the egg had been laid on Yom Tov or during the week, because since the egg will be permitted after Yom Tov, there is a principle that any item that will eventually become permitted is not nullified even when intermingled with a thousand items of its like. If, however, the uncertainty is whether the egg that was laid came from a treifa hen, then the egg will never be permitted and the egg should be nullified in the mixture by the majority of eggs that are permitted. The Gemara attempts to answer that the Baraisa is in accordance with the opinion that maintains that any item which is counted and thus sold individually is deemed to be significant and cannot be nullified.
