Siman 513

An egg that was laid on Yom Tov – it is forbidden to touch it, which is to say, to move it. That is to say: even though muktzeh is permitted to be touched, as I wrote in siman 308, nevertheless, an egg which is round – its touching is its moving, for it is impossible that it should not wobble. And this is what our teacher, the Rema, wrote in section 1 regarding this which is forbidden to touch it – which is to say, to move it, that is to say: that its touching constitutes its moving (and thus the Magen Avraham understood in subsection 2). And there is one who understood that his intention was to say that specifically moving is forbidden, but touching is permitted, and he raised a difficulty against him (Taz subsection 1). And it is not so. And there is one who holds that even touching without moving, if it is for the sake of the muktzeh – it is forbidden, and this was explained in siman 310, see there.

And since it is forbidden to touch it, all the more so is it forbidden to eat it. And so we learned in the Mishnah at the beginning of Beitzah, that an egg laid on Yom Tov may not be eaten. And the reason for the matter: it is not only necessary to state regarding a hen intended for raising eggs, for it is muktzeh and nolad. Rather, even regarding a hen intended for eating, which is not muktzeh—nevertheless, it is forbidden for another reason, as it is written: "And they shall prepare that which they bring." And we derive: a weekday prepares for Shabbat, and a weekday prepares for Yom Tov, but Yom Tov does not prepare for Shabbat, and Shabbat does not prepare for Yom Tov. And it is established by the sages that any egg laid today was completed yesterday. According to this, when Shabbat and Yom Tov are adjacent to one another, and it was laid on the Shabbat after Yom Tov or on the Yom Tov after Shabbat—the Shabbat prepared for Yom Tov or the Yom Tov for Shabbat, and the egg is forbidden by Torah law because of the prohibition of preparation. Therefore, our sages, of blessed memory, decreed regarding every Yom Tov because of a Yom Tov following Shabbat, and regarding every Shabbat because of a Shabbat following Yom Tov (Gemara beginning of Beitzah). Consequently, since it is forbidden for eating, it is forbidden for handling according to the one who holds of muktzeh on Yom Tov, for any object that is not fit for Yom Tov is muktzeh. (And the Magen Avraham at the end of subsection 1 wrote regarding the reason for the prohibition of its handling in the name of the Rashal: because of "we do not distinguish," see there. And it requires further study as to why he needed this. And in siman 515 he wrote himself according to our words, as the Machatzit HaShekel wrote, see there.)

It is found according to this that on a Yom Tov following Shabbat, or a Shabbat following Yom Tov—the prohibition is from the Torah. But on an ordinary Shabbat or Yom Tov—the prohibition is rabbinic due to a decree, as I have written. And one should not ask according to this, that if so, an egg laid on Shabbat or Yom Tov should not be eaten the next day on a weekday, for the Shabbat or Yom Tov prepared it for the weekday; for if its completion is considered preparation—all the more so its birth. But this is not a question, for the truth is that its birth is not considered preparation. And the proof for the matter: for if not so, an egg laid on a Yom Tov prior to Shabbat—should be prohibited on Shabbat due to preparation, and we do not find this in the Gemara, but rather because they are one sanctity regarding an egg, and not because of preparation which would be from the Torah. And similarly, an egg laid on a Shabbat prior to Yom Tov—is not prohibited on Yom Tov due to preparation from the Torah, but rather because of one sanctity. And the reason for the matter: for it is only called preparation when the creation comes into existence in the world, and not when it emerges into the world. For even originally it was so, and every egg laid today—the completion of its creation was yesterday.

However, in truth, regarding a weekday—we do not need this. For perforce we must say that regarding a weekday, the matter of hakhana does not apply at all; for if not so, an egg laid on the first day of the week—let it be forbidden, because yesterday it was completed, and it would be Shabbat preparing for a weekday. And so too, an egg laid on the day after Yom Tov—let it be forbidden. And for this, our teachers wrote that a weekday meal is not significant, and it is not relevant to say hakhana regarding it (Rashi and Tosafot, beginning of Beitzah).

If this egg was mixed even with a thousand—all of them are forbidden, and it is not nullified, for a thing that has permitters is not nullified even in a rabbinic prohibition. And all the more so according to the one who holds that an egg is a counted item, and is not nullified. However, most poskim do not hold so, as I wrote in Yoreh Deah at the beginning of siman 110, see there. And even if there is a doubt whether it was born on Yom Tov or on a weekday—it is also forbidden. And even if this doubt was mixed with a thousand. And all is for the reason of a thing that has permitters, for behold, at night it will be permitted. And it is possible to say that on an ordinary Yom Tov it is permitted, as it is a double doubt in a rabbinic matter. For behold, it is a double doubt: a doubt if it was born on Yom Tov, and if you say it was on Yom Tov—perhaps it is not this one that we took from the mixture. But on a Yom Tov that follows the Shabbat—it is a double doubt in a Torah matter. However, in Yoreh Deah there it was explained that any double doubt where one doubt is in its essence and one doubt is in a mixture—is not called a double doubt, see there. And perhaps in a rabbinic matter even this is called a double doubt. And see in Yoreh Deah siman 102 and siman 110 (see Magen Avraham subsection 4). And see what I wrote in siman 498.

Our teacher, the Beit Yosef, wrote in section 3: An egg that was laid on Yom Tov, which was inadvertently cooked with meat and a cooked dish, if there is sixty against it—everything is permitted except for the egg. But if they whitened the dish with it or the like, a matter that is made for appearance and taste—it is not nullified. Thus far his words. And the reason that sixty is effective is because in a case of a different species, even a thing that has permitters is nullified in sixty, as I wrote in Yoreh Deah siman 102. And they raised a difficulty against him: why do we need sixty? Behold, the egg does not impart taste at all, as I wrote in Yoreh Deah siman 86 that the liquid of eggs is merely water (Taz subsection 3). However, his intention was when it was cooked peeled, meaning that they previously cooked it and peeled it, and cooked it in a dish while the egg was whole, for then sixty is required as is explained in Yoreh Deah there. And there in siman 102, our teacher, the Rema, wrote that the taste is nullified even in a thing that has permitters. If so, even if it was cooked with eggs, which is a case of the same species—it is also nullified (Magen Avraham subsection 6).

And that which he wrote, that appearance and flavor are not nullified, meaning that even in a different species—it is like its own species, and it is not nullified in a thing that has permitters, and specifically regarding appearance and flavor. But without appearance—it is nullified even if it is made for flavor, and even though it comes to improve the pot (ibid. subsection 7). And it seems clear that if by evening the cooked food will spoil—that it is nullified. For it is a great principle regarding a thing that has permitters, that it is not called "a thing that has permitters" unless it will not spoil, as I wrote in Yoreh Deah there. And know that it is permitted to overturn a vessel over the egg, for we establish that a vessel may be moved for the sake of a thing that may not be moved, as I wrote in siman 310. Provided that he is careful that the vessel does not touch it, for by touching it he will move it.

Regarding the two festival days of the diaspora, if it was born on this one—it is permitted on this one, for behold, one of them is mundane. But regarding Rosh Hashanah: if it was born on the first day—it is forbidden on the second, for it is one sanctity, and a long sanctity. And so too regarding Shabbat and a festival day that are adjacent to one another, if it was born on this one—it is forbidden on this one. And even though we hold that they are two sanctities, and also preparation does not apply to birth as I have written, nevertheless from the rabbis it is forbidden due to preparation. That is to say: since on the first day it is forbidden from the rabbis, if you permit it for the second day—it turns out that the first prepared for the second and not for itself (Ran ibid.), and Shabbat and a festival day do not prepare for one another. And it turns out that this is also a semblance of preparation. And if it was born on Shabbat, and the festival day of the diaspora was on Sunday and Monday, it is permitted on Monday when it was born on Shabbat. And so too on a festival day that precedes Shabbat on Thursday and Friday, for if it was born on Thursday it is permitted on Shabbat. And on the festival day of Rosh Hashanah in such a case—it is forbidden all three days. (And as for why we do not say regarding the festival day of the diaspora "since it was set aside for the twilight period..."—see what I wrote in siman 638, section 5).

An egg, the majority of which emerged on the eve of Yom Tov and returned to its innards, and was subsequently born on Yom Tov—it is permitted, for since the majority emerged, we consider it as born. Therefore, even if one checked the hen's nest on the eve of Yom Tov close to darkness and did not find an egg in it, and the next day he rose early and found an egg—it is permitted, for it is established for our sages, of blessed memory, that a hen does not give birth at night, and perforce it gave birth while it was still day and he did not find it, or the majority of it emerged and returned. And our sages, of blessed memory, said that this applies to a hen that gives birth from a male. But one that gives birth to eggs from the warmth of the ground—it can give birth even at night. However, if there is a male rooster within sixty houses of the hen, and there is no river separating them that lacks a bridge—we attribute everything to the rooster. But if it is further than sixty houses, or there is a river without a bridge—it is forbidden when he checked yesterday close to darkness and did not find it. But if he did not check—even in such a case it is permitted, for we assume that it was born yesterday, as the majority give birth during the day even without a male. And this applies if he checked in the light of day. But if after that—in any case it is forbidden, for perhaps it gave birth today. And even though there is a doubt—it has already been explained that a doubt is forbidden (all this in Beitzah 7b).

Therefore, it is permitted to take eggs from a non-Jew on the first night of Yom Tov, because they were certainly laid during the day. And likewise on the second night of the two festival days of the Diaspora. However, not on the second night of Rosh Hashanah, and not on the second night of Shabbat and Yom Tov that are adjacent to one another, because of the reasons that have been explained. And a non-Jew who brings eggs on the first day of Yom Tov, and mentions incidentally that they were laid yesterday – it is permitted to rely on him, for he does not improve his sale by this, since an egg of the same day is better. Unless he knows that for an Israelite that which is laid today is forbidden, for then he is not believed, as perhaps he says this so that they will buy from him (Magen Avraham, subsection 11). And if the eggs belong to the Israelite, and he mentions incidentally that they were laid yesterday – he is believed even if he knows the law, since he is not personally affected by this. Nevertheless, some forbid. And regarding something similar to this, it was explained in Yoreh Deah siman 69 concerning a non-Jew who said that they salted the meat, and there it was explained regarding this (ibid.).

Regarding Shabbat and Yom Tov that are adjacent to one another, where the prohibition is due to the Torah-level prohibition of preparation—it is obvious that he is not believed when speaking inadvertently. For regarding a Torah-level matter, we do not rely on his words, except in the case of a woman whose husband died for the reason explained in Even HaEzer siman 17, and not in other matters. Therefore, he is not believed on the second day. However, on Rosh Hashanah he is believed, as it is a rabbinic matter. Nevertheless, if according to the circumstances it is evident that they were already laid, such as if he has a great multitude of eggs—it is possible to rely on him even on Shabbat and Yom Tov. And most of those who sell eggs are from those that were already laid (see Magen Avraham subsection 13).

One who slaughters a hen on Yom Tov and found within it finished eggs—they are permitted. And even on a Yom Tov that follows the Shabbat, for as long as it has not emerged, it is not called "preparation," because it is not yet fully completed; for it is not fit to hatch chicks, and the taste is not as good as an egg that has emerged outside (ibid. subsection 14), and it is nothing other than one of the organs of the hen. But a chick that was hatched on Yom Tov is forbidden. And if it was hatched on Shabbat, it is forbidden on the Yom Tov following it. So wrote the Tur in the name of his brother, that this too is called "preparation," since while in its shell it is not fit for eating at all, see there. That is to say: even though a calf born on Yom Tov is permitted when its months are complete, as I wrote in siman 498, nevertheless a chick hatched on Yom Tov is forbidden. For the calf is prepared by way of its mother through slaughter, but the hen in its shell is not fit even for a dog. And it is absolute muktzeh even according to the one who holds that muktzeh is permitted on Yom Tov, for this is like dried figs and raisins. And consequently, since it is forbidden on Yom Tov, if so, if you permit it on the Shabbat following it, it turns out that Yom Tov prepared for Shabbat, for it did not permit it for itself but permitted it for Shabbat, and it is rabbinic preparation. And this is like the preparation of an egg in section 8 which is rabbinic. And there is one who wishes to say that here it is Torah preparation (Taz subsection 11). And the main point is as I have written, and with this everything they questioned regarding this is settled. (And so it is implied in the Bach. And see Beit Yosef, and Taz there, and Magen Avraham subsection 15, who labored in the resolution of the questions. And according to what I have written it works out well. Examine it and you will find it easy.)