Babylonian Talmud

Rodkinson 1918 — source 7, scan section 4

We have learned in a Boraitha : Anonymous teacher* in the name of R. Eliezer said that the egg in question may be eaten TRACT BETZAH (YOM TOB). 5 together with the hen that laid it. To what case does the Boraitha refer? If the hen is kept for eating, then it is self- evident ; if it is a hen kept for laying eggs, then both are not allowed to be used. Said R. Zera : The Boraitha means to say that the egg can only then be eaten when the hen which laid it was also eaten. How shall it be explained ? Said Abayi : In case the hen was bought not for any definite purpose, if it was slaughtered and prepared, then it is clear that it was bought for the festivals, and the egg may also be used ; but if the hen is kept alive, then it is clear that it was bought with the intention to keep it for laying eggs, and then it must not be used. R. Mari, however, said that the Boraitha meant to say nothing, but merely exaggerated (i.e., the egg may be eaten in any manner), as we have learned in the following Tosephta : A new-laid egg may be eaten with the hen that laid it, and a new-born pullet with its shell. As the shell cannot be used and is only an exag- geration, so is it also meant with the egg and the hen which laid it. It was taught : If Sabbath fell after a festival, or vice versa, anything born on one of these days must not be used on the other. So said Rabh. R. Johanan, however, allowed it to be used on the morrow. Shall we assume that Rabh holds that both are of one and the same sanctitude ? Did not Rabh say that the Halakha prevails according to the four old sages * who are in accordance with R. Eliezer, who said that Sabbath and the festivals are of different sanctitudes? Nay, here they do not differ concerning the sanctitudes, but as to the law of preparation mentioned above in the name of Rabba. Rabh is in accordance with this theor}^ and R. Johanan is not. The Tanaim of the following Tosephta differ on the same point : If an egg was laid on the Sabbath, it may be eaten on the festival, and vice versa. R. Jehudah in the name of R. Eliezer, however, said, that there is still a difference of opinion among the schools of Shammai and Hillel. According to the former it may, and according to the latter it may not be eaten. The householder of R. Adda b. Ahabah had eggs which were laid on a festival preceding the Sabbath ; he came to him and inquired whether it is permitted to roast them that day, to be eaten on the morrow. He answered : What is thy question ? * See Tract Erubin, p. 82. 6 THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD. Because thou thinkest that when Rabh and R. Johanan differ the Halakha prevails according to the latter; yet even R. Johanan permits only to sip the egg when raw on the morrow, but he never permitted to handle it on the same day. The householder where R. Papa lived, according to others another man, had eggs which were laid on a Sabbath preceding a festival, and he asked R. Papa if they could be eaten on the mor- row, and R. Papa answered him : Leave it until to-morrow and come again, because Rabh did not use an interpreter on a festival day after meals to decide questions belonging to the next day, for fear, perhaps, that he had drunk more than a quarter of a lug of wine. When he came on the next day R. Papa said to him : If I had decided the question yesterday, when I was a little light- headed, I would have erred, and would have decided according to R. Johanan, as the rule is where Rabh and R. Johanan differ, the Halakha prevails always according to R. Johanan, and this would not be right, because Rabha said that the case in question is one of the three * where the Halakha prevails according to Rabh, both when he is lenient as well as rigorous. R. Johanan said : Wood which falls from a tree on Sabbath must not be used on the following festival day ; and if it would be asked what is the difference between the wood and the egg, it can be said that the egg can be used while raw just after it has been laid, and if left until the next day, because it must not be used on the same day ; but if the wood will be used just after Sabbath is over, one might say that the use of the wood was allowed on the same day, and that it was not used because it was prohibited to make a fire on Sabbath. R. Mathna said : If wood had fallen down from a tree directly into an oven on a festival day, one may add wood which had been prepared on the preceding day and burn it ; but is not this han- dHng a prohibited thing ? To this the answer is, because the bulk of the wood may be handled, the rest is ignored. But did he not ignore the prohibited wood intentionally? and a Mishna teaches that a prohibited thing must not be ignored on purpose. This, however, is only true of a biblical prohibition, but not of a rab- binical. But according to R. Ashi, who said that a thing which is prohibited only temporarily, cannot be ignored by any means, what can be said ? This is when the prohibited thing is preserved ; but here, when the wood is to be destroyed by fire, it is different. * As it will be explained further on, p. 8. TkACT BETZAH (YOM TOB). j It was taught about the two festival days in exile : Rabh said if anything was born on the first day, it may be eaten on the morrow, but R. Assi says it must not. Said R. Zera : It seems to me that R. Assi is correct in his opinion, because in our time the time of the calendar is known to us, and nevertheless we hold in exile two days of festival (consequently we must hold all the ordinances which were ordained in that time). Abayi, however, said : It seems to me that Rabh is correct in his opinion, and our keeping of two days of festival in exile is merely because a message was sent to us from the West : Take heed of the customs of your ancestors, as it can happen that the government might forbid the keeping of festivals, and the exact date might be forgotten (after the government should retract the command). It was taught : Rabh and Samuel both said of the two festi- val days of New Year : Something born on the first day must not be used on the other. Rabha said : From the day of the ordinance of Rabban Johanan ben Zakkai,* an egg which is laid on the first day of the New Year festival may be eaten on the next day. Said Abayi to him : Did not Rabh and Samuel both say that it is not allowed ? Rejoined Rabha : I say to you that of Johanan b. Zakkai, and you mention Rabh and Samuel to me [says the Gemara : Do really Rabh and Samuel contradict a Mishna ? Nay, it presents no difficulty : The ordinance of Johanan b. Zakkai was only for Palestine, but Rabh and Samuel speak for the exile]. R. Joseph, however, said even after the ordinance of Johanan