POINT BY POINT SUMMARY
by Rabbi Ephraim Becker
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question on the daf
Previous dafBeitzah 3
BEITZAH 2 and 3 - have been dedicated by Mrs. Rita Grunberger of Queens,
N.Y., in loving memory of her late husband, Yitzchok Yakov ben Eliyahu
Grunberger. Mr Grunberger helped many people quietly in an unassuming manner
and is sorely missed by all who knew him. Yahrzeit: 10 Sivan.
1) THE ANSWER OF R. YOSEF
(a) Answer: The egg of the chicken designated for eating is
prohibited as a Gezeirah with fallen fruit.
2) THE ANSWER OF R. YITZHOK
(b) Question (Abaye): But fallen fruit is itself a Gezeirah
(lest one climb up and cut a fruit), making the egg a
(c) Answer: The egg is part of the same Gezeirah as Peiros
(a) Answer: The egg is prohibited lest we permit juice
which oozed from a fruit.
(b) Question (Abaye): But that is a Gezeirah l'Gezeirah
(Mashkin SheZavu lest one come to squeeze the fruit)!?
3) WHY THE ANSWERS DIFFER
(c) Answer: The egg is included in the Gezeirah of Mashkin
(a) The others differ from R. Nachman because the question
regarding including both in the Mishnah was unresolved.
4) MASHKIN SHEZAVU
(b) The others differ from Rabah because they do not
subscribe to the Torah prohibition of Hachanah.
(c) Question: Why doesn't R. Yosef subscribe to R. Yitzhok?
(d) Answer: Because fruit and egg are both food, whereas
juice does not fit in.
(e) Question: Why doesn't R. Yitzhok subscribe to R. Yosef?
(f) Answer: Egg and juice share their being secreted from
their housing, unlike fruit which is always exposed.
(a) By questioning the seemingly contradictory opinions of
R. Yehudah, R. Yochanan demonstrates that he views the
Gezeirah of Beitzah as similar to Mashkin SheZavu (and
they would be either prohibited or permitted together).
1. In one Mishnah, R. Yehudah permits the oozing
juice if the fruit were intended for eating, thus
he does not apply the Gezeirah of Mashkin SheZavu
and permits the extract of food (Uchla d'Efras).
2. In another Mishnah (dealing with implications of
two days of YomTov), R. Yehudah prohibits an egg
laid on YomTov from being eaten that day (thus
seeing anything which oozes from its place, even
food, as being Asur).
3. R. Yochanan resolves the difficulty by switching
the positions of R. Yehudah and Rabanan in the
first Mishnah (dealing with Sechitah).
4. By raising the ruling regarding Mashkin SheZavu as
a contradiction to the ruling regarding Beitzah,
R. Yochanan has shown his view, as above.
(b) Ravina resolves the apparent contradiction between the
positions of R. Yehudah by asserting that R. Yehudah
(in the second Mishnah) was only responding to the
Rabanan given the latter's position.
5) S'FEIKA D'OREISA
1. R. Yehudah himself maintains that the egg would
even be permitted on that day (Uchla d'Efras) thus
his positions are consistent.
(c) Ravina b.R. Ula asserts that the contradiction does not
begin since the chicken spoken of in the second Mishnah
was designated for laying eggs and the issue in that
Mishnah is R. Yehudah's position on Muktzeh, not
2. To the Rabanan who prohibit the egg, R. Yehudah
asks that at least it should be permitted on the
second day since the two days of YomTov are Shtei
3. The Rabanan, however, hold that they are one
(a) Question: Rabah (who maintains the Torah prohibition of
Hachanah) seems to be the only understanding of our
Mishnah which also explains why a Safek egg is Asur and
will not be Batel, among the Halachos cited in the
Beraisa (whereas Mashkin SheZavu and Peiros HaNoshrin
are Gezeiros d'Rabanan, and should be Mutar b'Safek)!?
(b) Answer: This Beraisa is speaking of a Safek Tereifah.
(c) Question: Then it should be Batel, unlike Safek YomTov
which is a Davar SheYesh lo Matirin (and would
understandably not be Batel if it were d'Oreisa).
1. Answer: Beitzah is Chashuvah and is not Batel.
(d) Answer: This Tana maintains an extreme position (Litra
Ketzi'os), according the status of countable and not
Batel even to that which is Asur d'Rabanan.
2. Question: That is only true according to the
opinion which holds that anything which is, at
times, counted is viewed as Chashuv, but will not
hold according to the view (below) which only
accords the status of Chashuv to that which is
i. (R. Meir) Bundles of Tilsan of Kelai Kerem
are not Batel (must all be burned).
ii. (Chachamim) They are Batel in 201 (the normal
Bitul for Kilayim and Orlah).
iii. R. Meir views anything which [either, at
times or always], is counted as Chashuv and
not Batel while Chachamim restrict that
status to six (or, according to R. Akiva,
iv. (R. Yochanan) The word is Es (at times).
v. (Resh Lakish) The word is Kol (always).
vi. How, then, according to R. Yochanan, can an
egg (which is not always counted) be Chashuv
and not Batel?