Daf Ditty Beitza 3: Eggs, Solid or Liquid?

Proteins are essential for all living things to function. They are large molecules made up of
long chains of amino acids. Depending on the types of amino acids they have, proteins fold
in very specific ways. The way they fold controls what the proteins are able to do. Proteins
help move other molecules, respond to signals, make reactions happen more quickly, and
replicate DNA, among other things. However, if proteins lose their specific folded shape, they
are not able to work properly.

Proteins are long molecules that are twisted into a 3-Dimensional shape. That shape, based
on the way they fold, is important to their function. If they lose that shape, they stop working
properly. Click to enlarge.

Proteins require specific conditions to keep their shape. For example, most proteins in our
bodies rely on us to keep a warm (but not hot) body temperature, stay hydrated, and take in
enough of specific nutrients like salt. If our bodies aren’t able to maintain these conditions,
some of our proteins may not function as well, or at all. Most organisms actually produce
special proteins called “molecular chaperones” that help other proteins and molecules
continue to work even if conditions are becoming difficult to tolerate.

When a protein is exposed to conditions too far outside of a range it can tolerate, that
protein’s shape will come undone. This is called “denaturing” (basically, breaking) a protein.
We denature proteins all the time when we cook food (think: eggs). In this activity, we will
use common household products or processes to denature egg proteins in two main ways—

1
by cooking them, and by exposing them to concentrated alcohol (ethanol). Do you think egg
will look the same or different depending on how the proteins it holds are denatured?

§ The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita, which clarifies the issue differently: Both an
egg that was laid on Shabbat and an egg that was laid on a Festival are considered to be muktze,
and therefore in both cases, one may not move the egg, neither for the sake of food nor for any
other purpose: Not to cover a vessel with it, nor to support the legs of a bed with it.

However, if one wishes, he may cover the egg with a vessel, without handling the egg itself, so
that it does not break from being accidentally trodden upon. Although it is prohibited to move
the egg itself, it is nevertheless permitted to move a vessel for its sake. And even if there is
uncertainty with regard to whether this egg was laid on a Festival, it is prohibited to move it.
And, furthermore, if it became intermingled with a thousand permitted eggs, they are all
prohibited.

2
The Gemara notes: Granted, according to the opinion of Rabba, who said that an egg is
prohibited due to the lack of preparation, this case involves an uncertainty with regard to the
legal status of an item prohibited by Torah law; and in any case of an uncertainty with regard
to the legal status of an item prohibited by Torah law, the ruling is stringent. Therefore, the egg
is prohibited even if there is uncertainty whether it was laid on a Festival.

However, according to the opinions of Rav Yosef and Rabbi Yitzḥak, who say that an egg is
prohibited due to a decree, this case involves an uncertainty with regard to the legal status of an
item prohibited by rabbinic law, and in any case of an uncertainty with regard to the legal status
of an item prohibited by rabbinic law, the ruling is lenient.

The Gemara answers: In the latter clause of the baraita, we have arrived at a different case. The
case does not involve the prohibition of an egg laid on a Festival; the case involves an egg laid by
a chicken with regard to which there is uncertainty whether it is an animal with a condition that
will cause it to die within twelve months [tereifa], which is prohibited by Torah law. The
uncertainty with regard to the legal status of the chicken is relevant to the egg.

3
Summary

Why is it that we cannot eat an egg on Shabbat or a Festival? Perhaps an egg can be compared to
a fruit. Fruits that fall from the tree are not permitted on Shabbat or Festivals because one might
squeeze the juice - an action that is forbidden on those days. So the rabbis place a fence around
the fallen fruit - and also the egg. They are clearly aware that this is not a perfect analogy; however,
it seems to be good enough to warrant their debate.1

The rabbis take this fence a step further, remembering that the egg is actually formed within the
chicken's body the day before it is laid. Thus an egg laid on Sunday also cannot be used, as we
are not allowed to benefit from efforts on Shabbat (the rabbis do notice that the egg is not the work
of man but of heaven). This pushes the rabbis into a conversation about how we can stipulate
practices on Festivals when we might be unsure of which day is in fact a Festival day. Of course,
they also question tithing, in particular regarding a basket of fruit.

1
http://dafyomibeginner.blogspot.com/2014/04/beitza-3-b.html

4
Our notes share various arguments. Many of these question the original assertions: why is fallen
fruit forbidden? In fact, why is it wrong to pick fruit if that food is being prepared that very day
for Shabbat/a Festival? The rabbis disagree about minhag and about halacha. We watch them
attempt to understand and interpret the Mishnayot based on their own personalities, views and
communities. The notion of "fixed halacha" truly is a fiction, especially in the past.

Amud (b) conjures up the age old question, "which came first,...". The rabbis wonder how the
status of the chicken might affect that of the egg and vice versa. They question whether the egg is
forbidden because it is muktze, set aside, or whether it is forbidden because the chicken is
muktze. They question whether the chicken might be forbidden for other reasons, and the
complicating factor of tithing.

They even consider the fact that eggs are counted, and thus cannot be nullified in certain
considerations.2

I learned today that eggs that are not permitted if they were laid on Shabbat or a Festival. And
even if there is only one such egg in a large group of eggs, the entire egg collection is
forbidden. Again, this has to do with counting: when items must be counted individually and
cannot be disassembled into separate parts, those items are thought of as 'important', even as only
one in one thousand. The six (or seven, says Rabbi Akiva) items in this category are nuts (from a
special place), pomegranates (from another special place), sealed barrels of wine, stalks of spinach,
stalks of cabbage, pumpkin, and loaves of bread made by homeowners.

Those items are already restricted by orla (first three years of a tree's life yield no produce for our
benefit), diverse kinds (crops must be arranged to avoid any cross-contamination), and items that
must be counted. The rabbis then debate whether or not a litra3 of dried figs should be included
in this category.

So far, Masechet Beitza is focused on food and food preparation. It has been quite interesting. I
am wondering whether or not this text will continue to draw me in with its balance of argument,
halacha, stories and deeper questions.

Rav Avrohom Adler writes:4

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

2
We learn that when items are forbidden temporarily, they cannot be nullified. Why? Because their restriction is already time
limited.
3
Greek for 'pound'; we still use letters that remind us of the liter when we measure pounds: lb.
4
http://dafnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Beitzah_3.pdf

5
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.

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.

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 HaShanah, 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 discusses the egg that was laid on Rosh HaShanah refers to a hen which was

6
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.

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.

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.

Eating and Handling the Egg 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.

The Rashba in Avodas HaKodesh rules that one is forbidden to eat an egg that was laid on Yom
Tov, thus rendering the egg muktzeh, and one is prohibited from handling the egg on Yom Tov.
The Eimek Bracha asks on the Rashba from our Gemara because it would appear from the Baraisa
that in the case when there is a doubt if the egg was laid on Yom Tov and the Baraisa rules that it
is forbidden, one is also prohibited from handling the egg.

The Gemara can ask on Rabbah that Rabbah rules that one is biblically prohibited from eating an
egg which was laid on Yom Tov and therefore in a case of doubt, it will also be forbidden.
Regarding handling the egg, however, which in a case of certainty is only rabbinically forbidden,
it should not be forbidden to handle the egg. T

7
he Emek Bracha wants to prove from this Gemara that the reason of hachanah will biblically
prohibit one from eating the egg and from handling it and that is why in a case of doubt, it will be
forbidden to eat and to handle the egg. Bais HaLevi, cited in sefer Matikei Shemuah, writes that
when the Baraisa rules that the egg is forbidden in a case of doubt, that only refers to the prohibition
of eating the egg, as it is biblically prohibited to eat an egg which was not prepared prior to Yom
Tov. It is permitted to handle the egg, however, as handling the egg is only a rabbinical decree and
we are not stringent in a case of doubt.

Reb Dovid Newman in his sefer Avodas Yom Tov offers two answers to the question on the
Rashba. The Shach (Yoreh Deah 110) rules that when there is a case of doubt and there are two
halachic ramifications, we must either rule stringently or leniently regarding both applications. We
cannot rule stringently regarding one halacha and leniently regarding another. For this reason,
since the ruling in our case is that the egg is forbidden to eat, it must follow that the egg cannot be
handled even though it is only a rabbinical prohibition.

Another answer is that once it is decided that the egg cannot be eaten because it might not have
been prepared prior to Yom Tov, the egg automatically becomes muktzeh. We are not ruling that
it cannot be handled because of the uncertainty. Rather, once it has been decided that the egg
cannot be eaten, the egg is rendered muktzeh for certain and subsequently the egg cannot be
handled.

Picking Fruit on Shabbos

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 form 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.

Rashi writes that picking the fruits from the tree would be biblically prohibited under the category
of reaping, which is an av melacha, a primary prohibited act of labor. This is difficult to understand
as our case pertains to Yom Tov and this should be permitted on Yom Tov as picking the fruit is
performed in preparation for the food.

The Rashba in Shabbos (95a) proves from this Gemara that it is biblically prohibited to cut
something that is still connected to the ground even if the act is in preparation for the food. The
Rashba cites Tosfos, however, who maintains that it would be permitted to cut something that is
still connected to the ground since it is for the preparation of food. The Rashba explains that
according to Tosfos our Gemara would refer to a case where one picks the fruit at the end of Yom
Tov and it cannot possibly be used anymore in preparation for food for this Yom Tov. In such a
case it would be biblically forbidden to pick the fruit. Pnei Yehoshua (end of 2b) cites Rashi who

8
writes that one is prohibited from eating an egg that was laid on Yom Tov on account of the decree
of fruits falling from a tree on Shabbos.

The Pnei Yehoshua wonders why Rashi mentions Shabbos when our Gemara is discussing Yom
Tov. The Pnei Yehoshua quotes his grandfather, the Maginei Shlomo, who writes that Rashi is of
the opinion that tolesh, the act of reaping fruit, is rabbinically forbidden on Yom Tov because it
could have been performed prior to Yom Tov. The primary reason for the decree was because of
Shabbos and not because of Yom Tov. This is not considered a gezeirah ligzeira, a decree on
account of another decree, as Shabbos and Yom Tov are considered one.

Preparation and Shabbos

The Gemara discuses hachanah deRabbah, Rabbah’s law of preparation, which dictates that food
for a holy day must be prepared prior to the holy day on a weekday. It is noteworthy that the verse
where this principle is derived from states and it will be on the sixth day that they shall prepare the
manna which they bring.

The Medrash states that Yosef observed Shabbos in Egypt, as it is said have meat slaughtered and
prepare it. Perhaps the understanding of this statement is that Yosef represents the attribute of
yesod, foundation, which means that he observed the covenant of circumcision.

The word for prepared is hachen, which has its root in the word kan, which means base or
foundation. Thus, Yosef, being the tzaddik yesod olam, the righteous person who is the foundation
of the world, corresponds to Shabbos, and the Ohr HaChaim (Vayikra 19:3) writes that regarding
Shabbos and regarding Bris Milah, circumcision, the Torah writes the word os, a sign,
demonstrating that one who observes one of these signs is a catalyst for observing the other sign.

FRUIT THAT FELL FROM A TREE ON SHABBOS OR YOM TOV

Rav Mordechai Kornfeld writes:5

The Rabanan prohibited eating fruit that fell from a tree ("Peros ha'Noshrin") out of concern
that one might mistakenly assume that he is permitted to pick fruit directly from the tree.

Why was it necessary for the Rabanan to make such a Gezeirah? Even without that Gezeirah,
fruit that fell from a tree should be prohibited because it is Muktzah. Fruit that was attached
to a tree when Shabbos (or Yom Tov) arrived is Muktzah Machmas Isur because an Isur (the
Melachah of Kotzer) prevented the fruit from being picked.
The Gemara's secondary application of the Gezeirah -- to the case of an egg laid on Yom
Tov -- is logical, because the egg was not attached to the ground nor prohibited by any
Melachah before it was laid, and thus the only reason to prohibit the egg is the Gezeirah of
"Peros ha'Noshrin." Why, though, did the Rabanan apply the primary Gezeirah of "Peros
ha'Noshrin" to fruit that fell from a tree on Shabbos or Yom Tov, if such fruit is prohibited
anyway because of Muktzah?
5
https://dafyomi.co.il/beitzah/insites/bt-dt-003.htm

9
(a) TOSFOS (DH Gezeirah, and Shabbos 122a, DH Eini) suggests that perhaps this
Gezeirah was enacted only according to Rebbi Shimon, who does not apply the concept of
"Migo d'Iskatza'i" as long as a person anticipates that the object will become accessible at
some point on Shabbos (or Yom Tov). Since one expects fruit to fall from the tree on Shabbos,
that fruit does not become Muktzah irrevocably for the entire day at the onset of Shabbos.
However, RASHI (24b, DH vela'Erev) writes that even Rebbi Shimon agrees that an object
which was attached to the ground or to a tree at the onset of Shabbos or Yom Tov remains
Muktzah.

(b) TOSFOS gives another answer based on the Gemara in Pesachim (56b) which says that
even dates at the top of a tree are not Muktzah Machmas Isur when the owner of the tree
owns ravens and intends for his birds to eat the dates. Since he intends to derive benefit from
the dates on Shabbos or Yom Tov in a permitted manner (without having to pick them), the
dates are considered "Muchan" and do not become Muktzah (see Rashi to Pesachim 56b,
DH v'Chi Teima). Therefore, such fruit that falls from the tree would have been permitted if
not for the Gezeirah of "Peros ha'Noshrin."6

(c) The RAMBAN in Shabbos (144b, see Insights to Beitzah 2:5:d) says that an object is not
Muktzah Machmas Isur until one actively sets aside the object from use on Yom Tov.
Accordingly, fruit that falls from a tree might not be considered Muktzah according to the
Ramban, since one did not actively set aside that fruit. Similarly, according to the BA'AL
HA'ME'OR, who posits that when one knows that an object will become fit to eat later on
Shabbos the rule of "Migo d'Iskatza'i" does not apply (see Insights to Beitzah 2:5:c), the type
of fruit that usually falls from its tree every day should be permitted if not for the Gezeirah of
"Peros ha'Noshrin."

MELACHOS OF FOOD PREPARATION ON YOM TOV

The Gemara cites two more opinions (in addition to those of Rav Nachman and Rabah) to
explain why an egg laid on Yom Tov is prohibited according to Beis Hillel. Rav Yosef
maintains that it is prohibited because it is included in the Gezeirah of "Peros ha'Noshrin."
The Rabanan prohibited eating fruit that fell from a tree ("Peros ha'Noshrin") on Yom Tov out
of concern that one might mistakenly assume that he is permitted to pick fruit directly from
the tree.
Rebbi Yitzchak maintains that the egg is prohibited because it is included in the Gezeirah of
"Mashkin she'Zavu." The Rabanan prohibited juices that flowed from a fruit on Yom Tov, lest
one think that he is permitted to squeeze a fruit in order to extract its juice.

Why, though, are the acts of picking a fruit from a tree and squeezing the juice from a fruit
forbidden on Yom Tov? The Torah permits Melachah performed for Ochel Nefesh, food

6
Even though the person himself cannot derive personal benefit from dates while they are attached to a tree, it suffices that his
birds are able to derive benefit from them in order for the dates to be considered "prepared" for use on Shabbos. The Gemara in
Pesachim (ibid.) and later in Beitzah (6b) says that when a person knows that an object is fit for his animals and he has in mind
before Shabbos to use it on Shabbos for his animals, he also considers the possibility that it might become fit for himself at some
point on Shabbos. Therefore, the principle of "Migo d'Iskatza'i" does not apply to prohibit him from eating the fruit if it falls from
the tree.

10
preparation, on Yom Tov (see Shemos 12:16). The Melachos of picking a fruit (Ketzirah) and
squeezing a fruit (Sechitah) should be permitted since they are Melachos performed for Ochel
Nefesh. Why do these Gezeiros apply to Yom Tov if the Melachos they prevent one from
performing are Melachos of Ochel Nefesh?

This question relates to a more general issue. When the Torah permits Melachos of Ochel
Nefesh on Yom Tov, exactly which Melachos does it permit?

(a) Some Rishonim write that every Melachah that involves food preparation (including
Ketzirah and Sechitah) is permitted by the Torah on Yom Tov. The Rabanan, however,
enacted that certain Melachos are prohibited even though they involve food preparation.

The RAMBAM (Hilchos Yom Tov 1:5-8) writes that the Rabanan prohibited any Melachah
that could have been done on Erev Yom Tov without diminishing the quality of the food. The
purpose for this decree is to ensure that people enjoy the Yom Tov and experience Simchas
Yom Tov. This decree prevents them from postponing, until Yom Tov, all of the work they
needed to do in their fields.
The RA'AVAD, who agrees with the Rambam, gives a slightly different reason for why the
Rabanan did not want a person to leave all of his work until Yom Tov. To engage in excessive
toil on Yom Tov is not respectful to the Yom Tov (see Rambam, Hilchos Shabbos 24:12), and
thus the Rabanan prohibited leaving one's work in the field until Yom Tov. The Ra'avad adds
that picking fruit from a tree should not be prohibited for this reason, since produce is usually
more fresh on the day it is picked and thus it is not an act which can be done before Yom
Tov. Nevertheless, the Rabanan included this act in their decree. (The Yerushalmi bases the
prohibition on an Asmachta in the verse; see (c) below.)

It should be noted that when the Rambam and Ra'avad say that the Rabanan prohibited a
Melachah of Ochel Nefesh which could have been done before Yom Tov without diminishing
the food's quality, they refer to the general category of Melachah. That is, in order to
determine whether a certain Melachah is one which could have been done before Yom Tov
without diminishing the food's quality, the Rabanan inquired whether the general category of
Melachah is one which usually needs to be done on the same day the food will be consumed,
or whether the Melachah can be done a day earlier without impairing the quality of the food.
The Rabanan did not judge the specific act that one wants to do. Therefore, if a Melachah
usually can be done a day earlier without diminishing the quality of the food, then even if this
specific act must be done today it is still prohibited.

2. TOSFOS in Shabbos (95a, DH veha'Rodeh, and as quoted by the RASHBA there) and
the ROSH here (3:1) explain that the Rabanan prohibited certain acts on Yom Tov because
they are acts normally done on the weekday ("Uvda d'Chol"). The Rosh defines an act that is
normally done on the weekday as any act which is usually done in order to prepare food many
days in advance. (Whether a Melachah fits this category or not is judged by looking at the
Melachah in general and not by looking at each specific act, as mentioned above.) This
description of which Melachos the Rabanan prohibited is similar to the Rambam's description.
The difference between the two is that the Rambam says that the Rabanan prohibited a
Melachah that could be done earlier, while the Rosh says that the Rabanan prohibited a
Melachah that is usually done earlier.

11
The Gemara here teaches that the Rabanan prohibited fruit that fell from a tree and juice that
flowed from fruit in order to prevent one from thinking that he is permitted to pick a fruit from
a tree or to extract juice from a fruit on Yom Tov. Even though the prohibition of picking a fruit
or extracting its juice itself is only mid'Rabanan on Yom Tov (and the Rabanan do not enact
a Gezeirah to safeguard another Gezeirah), there is a situation in which these Melachos are
mid'Oraisa on Yom Tov.

The RASHBA in Shabbos (95a, in the name of Tosfos) explains that if one picks a fruit
immediately before nightfall at the end of Yom Tov, his Melachah is not done in order to eat
the fruit on Yom Tov but in order to eat it after Yom Tov, and thus his act is forbidden
mid'Oraisa (Pesachim 46b). Alternatively, the Rabanan prohibited a fruit that fell from a tree
lest one pick a fruit that will be edible only the next day, or lest one pick something that the
Torah prohibits him from eating. In these cases there is no allowance of Ochel Nefesh on
Yom Tov.

(b) RASHI (23b) writes, like the Rambam, that any Melachah which can be done before Yom
Tov is prohibited on Yom Tov. However, Rashi implies that it is prohibited mid'Oraisa and not
just mid'Rabanan as the Rambam maintains. That is the reason that one cannot pick fruit on
Yom Tov.

The RAMBAN (in Milchamos, 23b) rejects Rashi's opinion. He asks that according to Rashi
one should be permitted to pick fruit on Yom Tov when that fruit would spoil if picked before
Yom Tov!

Perhaps Rashi maintains that all categories of Melachah which are normally done before
Yom Tov are prohibited, as the Rambam and Ra'avad maintain (as mentioned above). Since
most fruits remain fresh for at least a day after they are picked, one is prohibited from
picking any fruit on Yom Tov, even a fruit of a type which will not remain fresh when picked a
day earlier. Conversely, any category of Melachah for Ochel Nefesh which is normally not
done before Yom Tov is permitted.

This also answers the question of TOSFOS (3a, DH Gezeirah)on Rashi's explanation from
the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah regarding "Machshirei" Ochel Nefesh. Rebbi Yehudah and the
Chachamim (28b) argue whether Machshirei Ochel Nefesh (secondary acts of food
preparation, such as sharpening a skewer in order to roast meat on it) may be done on Yom
Tov if they could not have been done the day before. The Gemara explains that even
according to Rebbi Yehudah, who permits such acts, if the Machshirei Ochel Nefesh could
have been done the day before, it is not permitted to be peerformed on Yom Tov. This is
learned from a Pasuk. According to Rashi's explanation one may ask, why is it necessary to
learn this distinction from a Pasuk? If even Melachos of first-hand food preparation are not
permitted on Yom Tov if they could have been done before Yom Tov, certainly Machshirin,
which involve more indirect food preparation, are not permitted on Yom Tov if they could have
been done before Yom Tov!

The answer to this question is that we learn from the verse to be more stringent with regard
to Machshirin than with regard to Ochel Nefesh. Melachah for Ochel Nefesh is permitted as
long as it falls into a category of Melachah that normally cannot be done the previous day.

12
But Melachah for Machshirei Ochel Nefesh is permitted only if the specific act that one is
doing cannot be done before Yom Tov.

(c) Other Rishonim explain that implications in the verse, "Ach Asher Ye'achel l'Chol Nefesh"
(Shemos 12:16), the verse which discusses Melachah on Yom Tov, exclude various
Melachos from the allowance to perform Melachah for Ochel Nefesh.

TOSFOS (3a, DH Gezeirah, and 23b, DH Ein) cites the Yerushalmi (Beitzah 1:10) that
derives from the verse that the Melachos of Kotzer (harvesting), Tochen (grinding), and
Meraked (sifting) are not included in the allowance of Ochel Nefesh. According to another
opinion in the Yerushalmi, the verse teaches that any Melachah which precedes Lishah
(kneading) in the order of food preparation may not be done on Yom Tov. (According to
the RAMBAN in Milchamos, the two opinions in the Yerushalmi agree about which Melachos
the verse excludes from the allowance of Ochel Nefesh. According to the RASHBA (Shabbos
95a), they argue only about the specific Melachah of Borer.) Tosfos adds that Tzeidah
(trapping) is also prohibited even though it is done for food preparation, since it is similar to
Kotzer. Hence, when the Torah excludes Kotzer from the allowance of Ochel Nefesh, it also
excludes Tzeidah. According to this approach, both Sechitah (extracting juice), which is the
Melachah of Mefarek, and Ketzirah (picking fruits) are prohibited mid'Oraisa on Yom Tov.

However, this explanation seems to contradict the Gemara in Shabbos (95a) which says that
according to Rebbi Eliezer, one who makes cheese on Yom Tov is liable for the Melachah
d'Oraisa of Boneh (building). Rashi explains that he is liable because he could have made
the cheese the day before Yom Tov. According to Tosfos, why should he be liable? Only
Melachos which come before Lishah are forbidden; Boneh comes after Lishah, and therefore
it should be permitted when done for Ochel Nefesh.

Tosfos in Megilah (7b) answers this question by stating an additional rule: any Melachah
which, when done before Yom Tov, produces a better-tasting food may not be done on Yom
Tov. Cheese tastes better when made before Yom Tov (the older the cheese, the better its
taste), and therefore making it on Yom Tov is forbidden mid'Oraisa. (Alternatively, the Gemara
in Shabbos refers to making cheese on Yom Tov at a time when one will not be able to eat it
until after Yom Tov.)

The RAMBAN (in Milchamos to 23b) and the RASHBA (Shabbos 95a) cite the Yerushalmi
(ibid.) and explain that the Yerushalmi does not refer only to the Melachos which it lists.
Rather, it also includes any act which is not a Melachah of food preparation. According to this
explanation, the Yerushalmi includes any act which is done in the process of food preparation
many days in advance is forbidden, because it is not considered an act of making food ready
to eat but rather an act of making a storehouse of food. In addition, any Melachah which does
not make food edible but merely makes it available (such as Kotzer, harvesting, or Tzeidah,
trapping) is not considered a Melachah necessary for food preparation and is forbidden.
The Ramban and Rashba differ from the Rishonim cited in (a) above. According to the
Ramban and Rashba, whether or not a Melachah is permitted on Yom Tov is not determined
by whether the Melachah in general is one which makes a food edible, but rather by whether
the specific act that is being done is an act which makes food edible.

13
(d) Other Rishonim derive from "Kol Meleches Avodah Lo Sa'asu" (Vayikra 23:7), the verse
which teaches the prohibition of Melachah on Yom Tov, that certain Melachos are forbidden
mid'Oraisa on Yom Tov even though they involve food preparation.

The RAMBAN (in Milchamos ibid.) suggests that the words "Meleches Avodah" ("a Melachah
of labor") exclude any category of Melachah which, although it involves food preparation, is
not done to make food edible (this is the same as (c:2) above).

Similarly, the MAGID MISHNEH (Hilchos Yom Tov 1:5) writes that "Meleches Avodah" refers
to a Melachah which one usually delegates to his servant. Melachos which are done to
prepare food for many days in advance are forbidden because one usually delegates such
Melachos to his servant.

(1) The chicken is also Asur because of Muktzah according to Rebbi Yehudah. (For this reason, the Gemara rejects this explanation,
because if this is the reason why the egg is Asur, then since the chicken is also Asur for this reason, the Mishnah should have
expressed the Machlokes between Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel with regard to the chicken itself.) Even though the Isur is only
mid'Rabanan, nevertheless it is considered severe enough that it is like an Isur d'Oraisa (Tosfos Yeshanim 3b).
(2) According to Rashi, the lack of proper Hachanah makes it an Isur d'Oraisa to eat the Muktzah item. According to the other
Rishonim, it is a separate Isur d'Oraisa to use an item that was prepared on Yom Tov for Shabbos, or on Shabbos for Yom Tov, but
it is not an Isur d'Oraisa of Muktzah (see Insights).
(3) Peiros ha'Noshrin, or fruits that fell from a tree on Yom Tov, are Asur because of a Gezeirah lest one, without thinking, pick
fruits off of a tree (see Insights regarding why picking fruits is Asur on Yom Tov). Concerning why the Rabanan had to make a
Gezeirah of Peiros sh'Noshrin, and the fruits that fell from a tree on Yom Tov are not Asur because of Muktzah, see Insights as
well.
(4) Mashkin she'Zavu, or juices that flowed from a fruit, are Asur because of a Gezeirah lest one think that it is permitted to squeeze
fruits to extract their juices on Yom Tov.

14
Steinzaltz (OBM) writes:7

In discussing the use of a newly laid egg on Shabbat or Yom Tov, the Gemara quotes
a baraita which teaches that using such an egg is forbidden; nevertheless it can be covered with a
bowl to protect it and then it can be used when Shabbat or Yom Tov has ended. The examples given
by the baraita of possible uses for the egg are of some interest – the baraita suggests that it might
have been used to cover a utensil or to support a bed.

Support a bed!? The rishonim were quick to ask why the baraita would suggest supporting a large,
heavy object like a bed with an egg.

In truth, mechanically speaking, the structure of an egg is, theoretically, very strong – strong
enough to withstand enormous pressure without breaking, even though its shell is very thin.
Practically, however, without a specially prepared apparatus, it would be impossible to have an
egg actually support something large and heavy.

Therefore, the logical approach to the baraita is the one suggested by the Me’iri and others. They
explain that the “bed” referred to is not a bed that people sleep on, but rather a type of bowl or
other utensil that is used on a table, which, because of its shape – some say that it has a rounded
bottom like that of a small ship – needs to be supported by something. An egg, apparently, was the
object of choice to hold up this “bed.”

To support his theory, the Me’iri points out a word in Arabic for such a table utensil – hamta –
which is similar to the Hebrew word for bed: ha-mitah. In Mishnayot Ma’asrot (1:9) we find the
word hamita used in such a context, and the Rambam in his Perush ha-Mishnayot there translates
the word as a small earthen vessel that is sometimes used on the table.

Rav Yosef explains that Beis Hillel agrees that an egg which is laid is technically allowed ‫מדאורייתא‬
but a rabbinic enactment was issued to prohibit it.8 The rabbis felt that this case was too similar to
‫—שנשרו פירות‬fruits which fell from a tree on Yom Tov. If such fruits were permitted, we are afraid
that people would then go and cut fruit from a tree itself.

Tosafos end of ‫ שמא גזירה ה”ד‬and ‫ ן”ר‬beginning of 3rd ‫)פרק‬note that we must understand why there
is, in fact, a concern about cutting fruits on Yom Tov. We know that the Torah allows ‫נפש אוכל‬

7
https://www.ou.org/life/torah/masechet_beitzah_26/
8
https://www.dafdigest.org/masechtos/Beitza%20003.pdf

15
‫מלאכת‬on Yom Tov. If the Torah allows actions necessary for food preparation, picking fruit should
be allowed, and there certainly should not be any ‫ גזירה‬needed to avoid such actions.

Based upon the Yerushalmi, Tosafos sets forth a classic rule. The verse which teaches that food
preparation is allowed on Yom Tov (Shemos 12:16) states “Only that which is eaten by all souls,”
and the subsequent verse (v. 17) tells us “You must guard the matzos.” We learn from the
juxtaposition of the verses that the only actions which are permitted on Yom Tov are those “from
kneading and on.”

All food preparation actions which are earlier in the food preparation process than kneading (such
as harvesting, threshing, winnowing, sifting, etc.) are not permitted on Yom Tov. This is why
collecting fruit off a tree is a violation of Yom Tov.

Shulchan Aruch (O.C. 495:2) rules according to the Yerushalmi, that the actions “from kneading
and on” are the only ones permitted. However, the ‫ מחבר‬adds that the distinction we make to
prohibit the earlier ‫ מלאכות‬is only rabbinic (‫ חכמים אסרום‬.(Mishnah Berurah (#13) adds that many
Rishonim learn that this is a Torah level distinction, and that these actions are disallowed, as
indicated in the Yerushalmi.

There exists a degree of uncertainty how to define a food and how to define a liquid. For example,
are yogurt, jello and pudding considered liquids or foods? What about ice cream or ices?

Rav Schneur Zalman of Liadi, author of Shulchan Aruch HaRav (1), writes that a food that has
dissolved to the point that one can drink it is no longer considered a food. Similarly, a liquid that
has congealed or frozen to the point where one would eat it is no longer considered a liquid.

Rav Yitzchak Yaakov Weiss (2), Teshuvas Minchas Yitzchak, further explains that anything that
requires chewing or sucking is considered a food and anything that does not require chewing or
swallowing is considered a liquid.

This issue is critical in determining when a brachah achronah should be recited on the earlier
mentioned foods. If they are considered food, the volume of an olive must be consumed to require
a brachah achronah but as a liquid the quantity that necessitates a brachah achronah would be the
volume of a revi’is.

According to the above guidelines, it would seem that a raw egg should certainly be considered a
liquid since it is neither chewed nor sucked. Nonetheless, there are a number of Poskim (3) who
maintain that a raw egg is considered a food rather than a liquid.

16
One proof is our Gemara, which equates a raw egg and a fruit as a food rather than a liquid. Rav
Betzalel Stern (4), Teshuvas B’tzeil HaChochmah, discusses an interesting application of this issue
where he writes that if one considered eggs to be food rather than a liquid there would not be any
restrictions against freezing whipped egg whites to make ice cream on Shabbos. The reason is that
the concern about freezing liquids is one of nolad creating a new entity, i.e. a liquid into a solid (5)

If, however, raw eggs are considered food rather than liquids the question of nolad does not arise
because it begins as a food and ends as a food.

Our daf includes a discussion about situations of doubt. One of the conclusions made is that
anything forbidden for a specific period of time only, like an egg that was laid on Yom Tov, cannot
be nullified even when intermingled with any amount, no matter how large.

Since one can wait until the factor which will permit it comes into effect (like the cessation of Yom
Tov), the ratio in which the forbidden item exists in relation to the permitted is irrelevant.

The Mekor Chaim, zt”l, explains this concept metaphorically: Even if a person knows a great deal
and has “a thousand” students who are hanging on his every word, the character defects that render
him “impure” are not nullified. If the teacher is disconnected from Torah and holiness, “Even if it
is only one impure part subsumed in a thousand, it is not nullified.”

Rav Simcha Wasserman, zt”l, once told a story about the head of a university history department
who came into a yeshiva one day to say kaddish. After the davening, the professor approached the
Rosh Yeshiva in a melancholy mood. “Rabbi, at this point in my life I find myself a very lonely
man,” sighed the professor.

17
The Rosh Yeshiva expressed some surprise. “How could it be that you feel so alone? You taught
in the university for over fifty years. Over the course of your career, how many students did you
have?” The two men made a quick calculation and figured that the professor had taught over
30,000 students.

The Rosh Yeshiva then asked, “Out of those 30,000, have any ever invited you to their wedding?”
Dejected, the professor shook his head. “Not a single one.”

The Rosh Yeshiva was astounded. What talmid would ever consider making a wedding without
inviting his rebbi? Impossible! It is obvious that when the Torah is transmitted with love, by a
person connected to holiness, the teacher becomes bonded with his “thousand”—and his own
character defects are also mitigated.

Two Meanings of the Word "Amora"

Rachel Scheinerman writes:9

Yesterday, we began this tractate with a mishnah about eggs. Specifically: Can you eat an egg that
was laid on a festival? Today we encounter a sugya that considers a similar debate: If Shabbat and
a festival fall on consecutive days, and a chicken lays an egg on the first of those days (and may
therefore not be eaten on that day), can it at least be eaten on the second day? In other words, if
the chicken laid an egg on Shabbat, can it be eaten on the festival that follows? Or, if the chicken
laid an egg on a festival day, can it be eaten on Shabbat which immediately follows? Rav says the
egg is permitted on the second day, but Rabbi Yehuda says it is forbidden.

The discussion introduces us to the idea of “two sanctities” — that Shabbat and festival days that
are consecutive are nonetheless considered separate sacred days, not one long block of sacred time.
This is why when Shabbat is followed by a festival we say Havdalah to mark the end of Shabbat,
but change the wording from “bein kodesh l’chol” (naming a distinction between sacred and
mundane time) to “bein kodesh l’kodesh” (distinguishing between one sacred time and another).

As it often does, the Gemara relates stories about this particular legal debate. The second of these
takes a surprising turn:

Rav Pappa’s host, and some say it was a certain man who came before Rav Pappa, had eggs
that were laid on a Shabbat before a festival. He came before him (Rav Pappa) and said to him:
What is the halakhah with regard to whether it is permitted to eat these eggs tomorrow (on the
festival)?

Rav Pappa said to him: Go away and come back tomorrow. He said this because Rav would not
place an amora before him from one festival day until the end of the second festival day, due to
drunkenness.

9
Myjewishlearning.com

18
When the man came back the following day, Rav Pappa said to him: Had I issued a ruling for
you then, I would have forgotten the correct response...

Rather than answer the question, Rav Pappa sends the questioner away because he has no amora,
no “speaker.” The amoraim were, essentially, human microphones for the sages. When a sage
lectured, an amora would repeat their words loudly, translated into the vernacular, and often with
explanation.

Like the alcoholic uncle everyone keeps from the microphone at a wedding, it seems that Rav
would habitually remove Rav Pappa’s amora, his “microphone,” on festivals because he was
inclined to get drunk and misremember halakhic minutiae.

You may of course recognize the word “amora” from a different context. The earliest generations
of named sages in the Talmud are the Tannaim. They lived between the first and early third
centuries. There are about eight more generations of named sages in the Talmud that come after
them who refer to themselves as Amoraim (the plural of Amora), which implies that they are
essentially spokespeople or amplifiers for the Tannaim, though they were certainly distinguished
sages in their own rights.

Rav Pappa, an Amora himself (in the generational sense of the term) seems not to mind that Rav
took away his amora (in the human microphone sense of the term). Rather, he apparently viewed
it amiably, as an act of kindness that prevented him from accidentally giving wrong instruction.
He seemingly has no difficulty admitting to his inebriated state, nor the fallibility of his memory.
The vulnerability is endearing — and it’s also a good reminder, amidst this page’s rigorous
examination of the permissibility of eating eggs laid at halakhically complex moments — that
festivals are not just about rules. They’re fundamentally about joy. L’chaim!

Rabbi Johnny Solomon writes:10

Having previously introduced the concept of ‫ נולד‬- whereby an item or substance that either
evolved into existence on Shabbat or Yom Tov, or assumed a new form that it did not previously
have, may not be used on Shabbat on Yom Tov (with the classic example being an egg laid on
Shabbat or Yom Tov) - today’s daf (Beitzah 3b) discusses the reason for this law and a variety of
‘what if’s’, such as ‘what if a prohibited egg became mixed with (i.e. unidentifiable among) a
thousand other eggs?’.

As you likely know, we have a variety of rules concerning ‫( תערובות‬mixtures) where a prohibited
item or substance becomes mixed with a permitted item or substance. But though we generally
rule that where the majority of a ‫ תערובות‬is the permitted item, then the prohibited item is ‫בטל‬
(nullified) and the whole mixture is (at least biblically) permitted, there are some exceptions which
are discussed in today’s daf.

One exception is what is known as ‫‘ – דבר שיש לו מתירין‬something prohibited that will, in the future,
become permitted’. What this means, as Rashi explains, is that since the egg will become permitted
10
www.rabbijohnnysolomon.com

19
after Shabbat and Yom Tov, it is forbidden to rely on the process of ‫( ביטול‬nullification). However,
two further exceptions are what is known as ‫( דבר חשוב‬an ‘important item’) and ‫( דבר שבמניין‬an
‘item that is generally counted’) which – due to their individual importance or singularity, are not
‫( בטל‬nullified) – meaning that even if you have a large mixture of something permitted, and a
prohibited ‫ דבר חשוב‬or a ‫ דבר שבמניין‬falls into it, then that prohibited item is not ‫ בטל‬and remains
prohibited.

Clearly, these are halachic principles with very practical halachic applications. But as I have
previously explained, I - along with others - am of the belief that there are at least some practical
halachic principles which contain or express deeper philosophical or theological ideas, and in
terms of ‫ דבר חשוב‬or ‫דבר שבמניין‬, these have previously been invoked by a variety of great Torah
teachers to demonstrate how Avraham Avinu, who lived in a region where those around him served
idols, did not nullify his principles or assimilate and adopt their ideas, but instead, maintained his
ideological singularity. Similarly, notwithstanding the small size of the Jewish people and our
great suffering and exiles throughout our history, we have – at least to some measure - maintained
ourselves as a nation due to the important spiritual, intellectual and moral contribution we have
made to the world, and due to our ideological singularity. Simply put, even when immersed in a
social, cultural or religious mixture different to oneself, if you view yourself as being ‘important’,
‘unique’ and ‘someone who matters’, then you will be able to maintain your whole self.

Of course, this is a powerful and relevant to each one of us wherever we find ourselves. However,
it is a particularly relevant message as we approach Rosh Hashanah, the anniversary of the creation
of humanity, from which we learn that just as the first being - Adam - was created unique, so too,
each of us are created unique (see Mishna Sanhedrin 4:5). As such, a core message of Rosh
Hashanah is to reflect on our uniqueness and on how each of us are ‘important’, ‘unique’ and
‘someone who matters’. And this is why we are told that it is on Rosh Hashanah that we pass
before God one by one (see Rosh Hashanah 18a), because by doing so, this affirms the uniqueness
of each one of us.

Rabbi Mendel Weinbach writes:11

Anyone who has studied the Torah account of creation has no doubt that the chicken came before
the egg. But how to view the egg which comes from the chicken presents an interesting problem -
is it like fruit produced by the chicken or like juice flowing from it?

An egg laid on a holiday, the first mishna in this mesechta teaches us, may not be eaten on that
day. The next couple of pages explain the reason for this rabbinic decree. The explanation offered
by two of the Sages, Rabbi Yosef and Rabbi Yitzchak, are similar - but with a crucial difference:

11
https://ohr.edu/this_week/the_weekly_daf/320

20
Rabbi Yosef compares such an egg to fruit which falls from a tree. The Sages decreed that fruit
which falls from a tree on a Shabbat or holiday is forbidden to be eaten on that day, lest it mislead
one to pick fruit from a tree in violation of Torah Law. And when the Sages made this decree, they
extended it to include anything like fruit, such as an egg, which drops from its source.

Rabbi Yitzchak, however, compares the egg to juice which flows from fruit. The Sages decreed
that juice which flows on its own from fruit on a Shabbat or holiday cannot be consumed on that
day, because it might mislead one to actually squeeze fruit for juice in violation of Torah Law.
And when they made this decree, they included anything resembling juice, such as an egg, which
flows from the source in which it is absorbed.

In explaining the difference between these seemingly similar approaches, the gemara focuses on
what we might laughingly describe as two sides of the egg. Since Rabbi Yosef views an egg as
food which is eaten rather than drunk, he concludes that it bears a closer resemblance to fruit than
to juice; thus, it is more likely to lead one to pick fruit rather than squeeze fruit for juice. Rabbi
Yitzchak, however, views the egg's relationship to its source as the criterion: Both the egg before
it is laid and the juice before it is squeezed are not visible, as is the fruit on the tree. Consumption
of the egg is therefore more likely to lead one to squeeze fruit to acquire its concealed juice than
it will to pick visible fruit from a tree.

There is indeed more than one way to view an egg, just as there is more than one way to eat an egg
- provided that it is not laid on a holy day.

21
 Still Life with Fruit, Bird's Nest and Broken Egg By George Forster

More takes on the egg

Mark Kerzner writes:12

Still trying to explain why an egg laid on a Holiday (Yom Tov) should not be eaten, Rabbah says
that we need to think of when has this egg completed its growth while inside the hen. This
happened on the day before.

What if that day was Shabbat? Then we have food being prepared on Shabbat for consumption on
a Holiday , and that is forbidden. Why? Because the Torah said, “On Friday they will prepare”
that is, only weekday can prepare for Shabbat or Yom Tov, but food cannot be prepared for Yom
Tom on Shabbat, even inside the hen. They asked Rabbah, Shabbat and Yom Tov do not always
occur on consecutive days, so the egg should be permitted then! He answered that the Sages
prohibited this in all situations, because sometimes Shabbat and Yom Tov do fall out on
consecutive days.

12
http://talmudilluminated.com/beitzah/beitzah3.html

22
Rav Yosef said that the egg is forbidden because “it is similar to fruit falling from a tree” which
are forbidden. But, we may ask, the fruit are only forbidden because we want to stop the people
from climbing trees and harvesting the fruit, so that itself is a stringency, why do we need another
one on top of it? He answered that the Sages prohibited the fruit falling from a tree and the egg
laid on a Yom Tom in one fell swoop.

Rav Yitzchak said that the egg is similar to juice flowing from a fruit. They asked him the same
question as above: juice is forbidden only because one might come to squeeze it out himself, so
that itself is a stringency, and you are adding another stringency on top of it! He gave a similar
answer, that it is all part of one decree.

Now we have four possible explanations for the egg, and the Talmud discussed why each of the
proponents does not accept the explanation of the others.

Rav Moshe Taragin writes:13

Typically, a prohibited substance which become mixed with a permissible one confers

an issur upon the host substance – the resulting mixture is known as a ta'arovet. If the prohibited

item is significantly smaller than the permitted item, it becomes 'batel,' meaning it loses its identity

and can be eaten along with the permitted item. In cases in which the prohibited item remains

easily identifiable, it must be removed, but the remaining mixture can be eaten even though it

contains traces of the prohibited item's taste. Generally the prohibited item becomes permissible if

is outnumbered by a ratio of sixty-to-one (batel b'shishim).

13
https://etzion.org.il/en/talmud/seder-moed/massekhet-beitza/yesh-lo-matirin-i

23
There are, however, certain exceptions to these general rules. Certain items remain forbidden, and

thus prohibit the entire mixture, even though they exist is quantities less than one-sixtieth of the

mixture. One example is a davar she-yesh lo matirin – an item which is currently forbidden, but

whose prohibition will eventually fade. For example, an item born on Shabbat (nolad, which is

forbidden as a form of mukzeh) will become permissible after the passage of Shabbat. If it becomes

mixed with permissible food, the entire mixture remains forbidden, even if the permissible

substance outnumbers the forbidden material by more than sixty-to-one. How should this principle

be understood?

The simplest approach to the issue stems from a gemara in Beitza (3b) which suspends the general

principle of safek de-rabanan le-kula in cases of davar she-yesh lo matirin. Generally speaking,

any safek (doubt as to the correct halakha) surrounding a rabbinic prohibition is decided in a

lenient manner. And indeed, since a nolad item is only a rabbinic safek issur, it should be

permissible. The gemara in Beitza explains, however, that since nolad is an issur of davar she-

yesh lo matirin, we do not act leniently in a situation of safek. Because simply waiting until after

Shabbat will enable the item to be eaten without trace of issur, we do not utilize the typical leniency

that we would otherwise employ. The identical logic can be applied to the issue of eating

a ta'aroves, even one whose permissible content outweighs its forbidden content - if the forbidden

item is yesh lo matirin, then simply waiting out the issur allows the item to be eaten with no worry.

The Ran, in his commentary to the first mishna in the 5th chapter of Nedarim, provides a different

reason for why a ta'arovet of davar she-yesh lo matirin remains forbidden even when its ratio is

more than sixty-to-one. Essentially, the concept of bitul results from an encounter between

clashing forces – assur and muttar items. As each item's identity is independent, each one seeks to

impose its identity upon the other. If the permitted item outweighs the forbidden one by a sizable

24
enough majority, it triumphs, whereas in less lopsided cases the forbidden item retains its identity.

A forbidden item that will eventually transform into a permissible one is not inherently defined as

forbidden, since its title is fleeting. Without the inherent status of 'issur,' there is no clash or

collision, and bitul does not occur. It emerges that according to the gemara in Beitza, bitul of davar

she-yesh lo matirin is artificially suspended, because of a general wariness to apply leniencies for

temporary issurim. According to the Ran, however, the very dynamic of bitul is inherently

inapplicable to yesh lo matirin substances.

Conceivably, the question of why a davar she-yesh lo matirim remains forbidden may impact upon

the scope of the rule. In other words, it might effect which types of items halakha would recognize

as yesh lo matirin, for which it would suspend the laws of ta'arovet. Perhaps the most famous (and

practical) issue surrounds the status of chametz. It is clear that the bitul process is suspended

for chametz – chametz is considered assur be-mashehu, forbidden in mixtures even in negligible

amounts. What is less clear is why chametz is treated with such stringency. Many authorities claim

that the stringency is intrinsic, based upon the severity of the issur of chametz. However, the

Rambam (Ma'achalot Assurot 15:9) and the Ramban (in his comments to Pesachim) both claim

that the strictness with regards to chametz stems from its status as a davar she-yesh lo matirin since

it may be eaten (at least on a de-oraita level) after Pesach has passed. Those Rishonim who

maintain that the issue is the intrinsic strictness of chametz counter that chametz should not be

considered yesh lo matirin, since it will continually cycle between being permissible and being

forbidden (Mordechai in Pesachim and the Ohr Zaruah). After all, at the conclusion of Pesach the

prohibition will vanish, but it will return a year hence when Pesach returns. An issur which fades,

only to reappear later on, should not be considered yesh lo matirin.

25
Now, if the stringency associated with yesh lo matirin items was based on the practical logic

suggested by the gemara in Beitza – i.e. that waiting will allow the item to be eaten under less

questionable circumstances - we would certainly side with the Rambam and the

Ramban. Chametz can certainly be eaten after Pesach, so it would be better to wait than to allow

a ta'arovet. If, however, we apply the Ran's logic that yesh lo matirin is considered a not-yet

permissible item, which doesn't clash with totally permitted items, we would not define chametz as

a davar she-yesh lo matirin - because its issur is cyclical, we would consider it to be totally

forbidden. As a fully prohibited item, then, it could participate in the process of bitul, and as such,

the prohibition of a chametz ta'arovet must result from chametz's intrinsic strictness, not from the

fact that it will be permitted in the future. In fact, the Tzelach (written by the Noda be-Yehuda) in

his comments to Beiza 4b, establishes this association between the reason underlying yesh lo

matirin and the application to chametz.

Conceivably, this question might impact upon standard mukzeh as well as items she-yesh lo

matirin. Nolad items become permanently permissible after Shabbat or Yom Tov, and are

therefore yesh lo matirin. Mukzeh items, however, could be seen as re-establishing their

prohibition with the arrival of the next Shabbat. In fact, it appears from Tosafot in Beiza (10b)

that mukzeh is considered davar sheyesh lo matirin. Many have suggested that the Rambam too

would consider mukzeh to be a davar she-yesh lo matirin, in keeping with his definition

of chametz. (See Sefer Sha'ar Hamelech to Hilchot Yom Tov 2:6).

The scope of yesh lo matirin might be at issue in a second question as well, regarding an item

whose prohibition is based upon uncertainty. For such an item, the passage of time will not

eliminate the prohibition, but rather elucidate it. One example would be an egg which is born from

an animal which may or may not be a tereifa (terminally ill, and therefore forbidden to eat). We

26
cannot unquestionably determine the mother's status until either a year passes (at which time it

will be evident that the animal is indeed healthy), or the animal gives birth (in which case the same

judgement will be rendered). Would this egg be considered a davar she-yesh lo matirin? Most

authorities state that it would not be considered yesh lo matirin; however, the Kessef Mishna (in

his commentary to the Rambam Hilchot Avoda Zara 7:10) claims that it would be. Presumably,

the Kessef Mishna viewed the halakha in the practical manner suggested by the gemara in Beitza;

since waiting will clarify the matter, and possibly remove any trace of the issur, there is no reason

to apply any leniency. If we endorse the Ran's logic, however, the egg should participate in some

form of ta'arovet bitul, despite its uncertain status. The issur being discussed is an absolute one -

if the mother is indeed determined to be a tereifah, then the egg will never become permitted. If

the egg ever is to become permitted, it will be because we become convinced that its mother is

healthy, not because the issur itself fades away. As such, it should participate in bitul, and not be

considered a davar she-yesh lo matirin. Perhaps the Rishonim who disagree with the Kesef

Mishnah do so for this reason.

A structurally similar question concerns an item whose issur will fade, but whose quality will

deteriorate. Most Rishonim (Mordechai in Pesachim 2:573, and the Rashba and Ran on Beiza 4b)

all claim that such an item should not be considered a davar she-yesh lo matirin. In fact, whichever

logic we adopt would yield this conclusion. If the suspension of bitul were based upon the practical

logic of waiting out the prohibition, the pending deterioration would not allow for such a policy.

Alternatively, the item would be considered fully assur, and a candidate for bitul, even though it

will eventually be permitted, because the item in its current, non-deteriorated state will never

witness the removal of the issur. Indeed, the same Ran, who claimed that a yesh lo matirin item is

inherently not a candidate for bitul, denies yesh lo matirin status to items which may deteriorate.

27
Rabbi Akiva Eiger (in his comments to Yoreh De'a 102), quotes the dissenting opinion of the Yam

shel Shlomo, who does accord yesh lo matirin status to items whose fading issur will be

accompanied by significant deterioration. The best way to defend this dissenting opinion would

be to adopt a modified version of the Ran's logic. Since the issur will vanish, the item cannot be

defined as inherently forbidden, and thus cannot participate in bitul, despite the deterioration.

Spin up some egg-cellent science: Learn how to use physics and a little kitchen
chemistry to find out if an egg is raw or cooked--all without cracking a shell.

Raw or Cooked? That Is the Question!

Sabine De Brabandere writes:14

Introduction

14
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/raw-or-cooked-that-is-the-question/

28
Have you ever found an egg in your refrigerator and wondered if it was raw or cooked? Although
eggs drastically change inside their shell when cooked, it is still remarkably difficult to distinguish
a cooked egg from a raw one without cracking it open. In this activity, you will find out how
physics can help you tell the difference!

Background

A bird egg contains a yolk enclosed in a membrane, which is surrounded by a clear fluid (egg
white, or albumen)—all packaged together in a hard shell. The egg white primarily consists of
proteins floating around in water. The yolk holds protein, some fat, water, and the majority of the
vitamin and mineral content of the egg.

Before being cooked, the egg white and yolk are liquid; their particles are not stuck to the particles
close to them but instead flow alongside and over one another. The yolk is separated from the
white by a membrane, but the particles on either side of this membrane are free to move around.

When the egg gets heated up, these liquids undergo a chemical change. The proteins unravel and
bind to one another, which results in a network of proteins that traps water. During this time, the
yolk and egg white become gel-like flexible solids. When the egg cools, the bonds become more
rigid, and the contents become solid. The shape of those contents and the distribution of their mass
within the egg become fixed.

The shell of an egg is primarily made of calcium carbonate. It does not change when placed in
boiling water. Although the shell has pores that allow air and other small particles to pass through,
almost no exchange of matter occurs during the cooking process. This arrangement means that the
mass of the egg does not significantly change.

So if you boil an egg in its shell, its outward appearance does not alter—and neither does its mass.
How can you tell whether an egg is raw or cooked without cracking it open? Try this activity to
find out!

Materials

Six raw chicken eggs, similar in size and color (be sure to wash your hands well with soap and
warm water after handling raw eggs)
• Saucepan
• Stove (use caution and ask an adult to help you use the stove and handle hot items in this
activity)
• Water
• Timer
• Slotted spoon

29
 • Bowl
• Pencil
• Sheet of paper

Preparation

• Pour cold water into your bowl.

• Place three eggs in the saucepan and add enough water so about half an inch of it covers
the eggs. Have an adult help you put the saucepan on the stove and turn on the burner.
• Heat the water until it comes to a rapid boil and keep it boiling for seven minutes. How do
you think the eggs are changing during this time?
• Turn off the burner.
• Have an adult help you use the slotted spoon to carefully take out each egg, one at a time,
from the hot water and place it in the bowl of cold water while being careful to not crack
it. Allow the eggs to cool completely.
• Use a pencil to make a small mark on the three eggs that are still raw. Keep the mark subtle
because it will make it easier to test your ideas in an unbiased way.
• Store the raw eggs together with the cooked ones. Doing so ensures that all of the eggs will
be at the same temperature when you start your tests.

Procedure

• Choose a raw egg and crack it open on a plate. How does the content of the raw egg
look? (Be sure to wash your hands well after handling raw egg.)
• Repeat the first step with a cooked egg. How does the content of a cooked egg differ from
that of a raw egg?
• The goal of this activity is to find a test that can identify whether an egg is cooked or raw
without cracking the shell. What are your ideas?
• Choose one cooked egg and one raw egg from the four uncracked eggs that are left. Put the
other two eggs aside for now.
• If you find a difference between the two eggs (besides your mark), note it on your sheet of
paper.
• Look at the eggs, smell them and weigh them in your hands. Does one look different, smell
different or seem heavier than the other?
• Gently tap your pencil against the cooked egg and listen. Then do the same with the raw
egg. Can you hear a difference?
• Shake the eggs, one at a time, close to your ear. Can you hear which one is raw?
• Put one egg on its tip and spin it. Try it a few times before switching to the other egg. Does
one spin more easily than the other?
• Perform any other test or look for any other distinguishing characteristics (besides your
mark) that you can think of.
• Review your notes. Did you find differences? If so, do you think any of these differences
appear because one of the eggs is cooked and the other is not? Why or why not?
• If you found one or more differences between the raw and cooked egg, perform tests to see
if they also appear in your last pair of eggs. Try not to look at the little mark on the raw

30
 egg while doing the tests. Do the differences distinguish the raw egg from the cooked one
in this pair, too?
• If you found a difference that held up for both pairs, do you think it can differentiate all
cooked eggs from raw eggs? Why do you think the difference occurs?

Cleanup

Be sure to wash your hands with soap and warm water after handling raw eggs. If you stored and
handled your eggs safely, you can eat your hard-boiled ones—and cook your raw ones.

Observations and Results

It was probably impossible to tell the raw eggs apart from the cooked ones without cracking the
shell until you tried to spin the eggs on their tip. Even though it is difficult to spin a cooked egg,
spinning a raw egg was probably much harder.

When you boil an egg, the inside becomes solid. This transformation does not, however, change
the egg’s appearance from the outside, its odor or its sound.

But you can tell the difference between a cooked egg and a raw one by spinning them on their
point: a cooked egg is easier to spin. Because the inside of a cooked egg is solid, the particles
within it cannot move around relative to one another or the shell. So all of the inside particles move
in unison, along with the shell. In a raw egg, however, the inside is still liquid. The particles that
make up the liquid can slide and move around separately from one another and the shell. When
you spin the shell of the raw egg, the liquid inside does not start spinning right away—it needs
some time to “catch up,” and friction between the shell and the liquid slows down the spinning
motion. Because it is easier to balance an egg on its tip by spinning it faster, cooked eggs are easier
to balance than raw ones. It also helps that the inside of the cooked egg is less wobbly because it
does not move around separately, and its center of mass is fixed.

31
 Why Does an Egg Becomes Solid Upon Heating?

Hemant Charaya writes:15

Generally, when heat is applied to any matter, its atoms/molecules gain energy to overcome the

attractive interatomic/intermolecular forces and transform to a state that has higher degree of

freedom. For example, solid converts to liquid (melting), liquid to gas (vaporization), or in some

cases solid directly transforming into gas (sublimation). Contrary to this, however, when an egg is

cooked or boiled, it transforms from a transparent liquid to an opaque solid mass. Have you ever

wondered why this anomaly arises?

As you might know, proteins are the major constituent of eggs following water. When these proteins

are subjected to heat while cooking, they undergo a process called “Protein Denaturation” which

is responsible for this unprecedented occurrence. Evident from its name, protein denaturation is a

phenomenon in which the native state of proteins gets disrupted when an external stress is applied

to it. This external stress can be in the form of change in pH, application of heat, mixing to a non–

polar solvent or addition of any salt. To answer the question at hand & appreciate the concept of

protein denaturation on a deeper scientific level, we need to understand how proteins are formed &

the conformations they attain in their native state.

The Four Levels of Protein Structure

15
https://medium.com/@hemantcharaya/why-does-an-egg-becomes-solid-upon-heating-3e04a803878d

32
Proteins are a complex entity with complicated three–dimensional structure that evolves at four

levels i.e. Primary, Secondary, Tertiary and Quaternary structures. The building blocks of proteins

(& essentially for all living organisms) are amino acids which are organic molecules having a basic

“amine” (–NH2) & an acidic “carboxyl” (–COOH) functional groups (that’s why the name “amino–

acid”) bonded to a carbon atom — called ‘α–carbon’– that further has a “side chain” attached to it

(Fig 1). It is this “side chain” that imparts distinctive identity to any amino acid since apart from it

they all possess similar molecular arrangement & composition.

33
It requires twenty different forms of amino acids to formulate all the proteins found in a human

body. Look closely, and you will find all these amino acids having distinct side chains attached to

a common backbone comprising of α–carbon, amine & carboxyl functional groups.

34
When amino acids undergo condensation polymerization — a chain reaction where amine group of

an amino acid reacts with carboxyl group of another to form peptide linkages (–CONH) (Fig 2)–

they form a macromolecule called polypeptide. These polypeptides when achieve a distinct three-

dimensional structure, by virtue of underlying intermolecular interactions, they are termed as

proteins. The conformation in a 3D space is the very essence of a protein as it determines the

function it can & will perform inside the body.

The structure of any polypeptide can broadly be segmented into its (i) “backbone” — consisting of

all the α–carbon atoms and the peptide linkages in the polymer chain — and (ii) “side–chains” —

collection of all individual side chains attached to the amino acids constructing that polypeptide.

The sequence in which different amino acids fall within the chain of polypeptide forms “Primary

Structure” of the protein. Even a single alteration in this sequence would result in formation of a

totally different protein with a unique 3D conformation and ability to function in a particular way.

The polarity of peptide linkages in the “backbone” of polypeptides is responsible for the secondary
structure of proteins— Due to the high electronegativity of Oxygen & Nitrogen, a partial negative
& positive charge is respectively developed on ‘O’ & ‘H’ atoms of the amide bond (Fig 3). This
promotes electrostatic attraction between the ‘O’ & ‘H’ atoms of two peptide linkages (also termed
as hydrogen bonding). When amide bonds of the same polypeptide take part in hydrogen bonding,
they attain α–helix structure which resembles a folded ribbon (Fig 3(a)). On the other hand,
involvement of separate (two or more) polypeptides gives rise to a Ᏸ–sheet structure (Fig 3(b)).

35
Tertiary structure of proteins originates from intermolecular interactions within the “side–
chains” of polypeptides. In contrast with secondary structure, there are various kinds of
intermolecular forces between the side chains, besides hydrogen bonding, that partake in the
formation of tertiary structure including electrostatic attraction between charged functional groups,
dipole–dipole interactions, hydrophobic associations & disulfide linkages. Among them, the major
contribution comes from the undergoing hydrophobic interactions between the non–polar side
chains in the protein.

These hydrophobic interactions arise due to the “like dissolves like” rule where a polar solvent has
strong propensity to dissolve polar solutes (e.g. — a combination of water with any salt) and
likewise, a non–polar solvent tends to dissolve a non–polar solute. Typically, when a non–polar
solute is dissolved in a polar solvent then due to their incompatibility, the solute molecules
aggregate together to form clusters (micelles) to minimize the level of their interaction with
surrounding polar molecules of the solvent.

This is the very reason why phase separation of oil happens when it is mixed with water. Because
of hydrophobic interactions, the proteins form globular (spherical) structure in water where the
hydrophobic side–chains locate in the core of globule — far away from water molecules — and the
hydrophilic groups find themselves on the surface of globule to interact with water (Fig 4). An
excellent illustration to visualize globular structure in proteins is a yarn ball where wool threads

36
depicts the polymer chains of the protein which are wrapped around on itself to give it a globular
shape.

Some proteins consist of a single polypeptide chain (e.g. ribonuclease), but many times multiple

polypeptides come together to form a protein (Fig 5). Hemoglobin, the oxygen carrier in our blood,
is one such example of protein which is made of four polypeptides with two α–helix and two Ᏸ–

sheet structures. These kinds of proteins, due to the presence of multiple polypeptides, have the

ability to perform multiple functions at the same time. Each polypeptide in these proteins, is called

a subunit and their relative arrangement makes up the quaternary structure of a protein.

Protein Denaturation of Eggs While Cooking

Both components of an egg — egg white & egg yolk — are colloidal solutions of proteins in water.

Majority of intermolecular interactions, particularly the hydrogen bonding & hydrophobic

interactions, that gives proteins their complex globular structure are weak in nature & thus can

37
easily be broken down when they are set to high temperatures while cooking. As a result, proteins

lose their secondary, tertiary and quaternary structures with the application of heat. However,

covalent bonds in peptide linkages of proteins are quite strong for them to be affected at these

temperatures and hence protein retains its primary structure. When these forces are overcome, the

polymer chains of the globular proteins unwind as they weave & entangle together to give rise to

an opaque solid mass. This process is quite analogous to the hand knitting of yarn where yarn

threads are unraveled while preparing a knitted sweater (Fig 6). The egg white solidifies faster due

to its higher protein content as compared to egg yolk which has more fat and thereby less protein

content.

Fig 6: Molecular simulation of the unfolding of 2CL2 protein with the application of heat.

The phenomenon of polymer chains unwinding in protein denaturation is essentially a reversible

process i.e. when subjected to right conditions, proteins will regain their 3D conformations. The

38
reason, however, you cannot convert back your omelette or boiled egg to a raw egg is because

various new covalent bonds are also formed during this heating process which cannot be reversed.

As mentioned at the start, there are various forms of external stresses that can cause protein

denaturation and will essentially show similar effects. For example, when raw egg is put in acetone

— a hydrophobic solvent— polypeptide chains again unfold and as a result egg solidifies (watch

this video). Likewise, adding an egg to salty water will stimulate the same response. This is the

reason why it is widely suggested to add some table salt to the water while boiling the eggs, because

in case the shell cracks and egg white starts to seep out, it will solidify moment after it comes in

contact with the salt water and would prevent any further leakage.

So the next time you cook eggs for your breakfast, remember that you are just breaking down the

complex protein structures inside it.

39