1. The six days on which the Torah forbade work are the first and seventh days of Pesach, the first and eighth days of the festival of Sukkot, the festival of Shavuot, and the first day of the seventh month.¹I.e., Rosh HaShanah, the first of Tishrei, which is the seventh month when counting from Nisan. Significantly, the name Rosh HaShanah is not mentioned in the Torah at all. They are referred to as holidays.

The [obligation to] rest is the same on all these days; it is forbidden to perform all types of servile labor,²Our interpretation of the words מלאכת עבודה as "servile labor" is based on the gloss of the Maggid Mishneh on Halachah 5. There he interprets it as referring to tasks that a person would hire a servant to do rather than perform himself.

In his commentary on the Torah (Leviticus 23:7 , the Ramban explains that with the expression "servile labor," the Torah intends to distinguish between work performed to prepare food (which he terms "gratifying labor") and the other forms of labor. According to the Ramban, the Torah never forbade the performance of the activities included in the labors necessary for the preparation of food. Any restrictions placed on them are Rabbinic in nature.

The Ramban's conception is also reflected in the statements of Rashi (Beitzah 12a), who interprets the Talmud's ruling (see Halachah 4), "Since [these labors] were permitted for the sake [of preparing food], they are permitted even when [they are performed] without such an intent," as meaning that, according to the Torah, there is no prohibition against performing these labors at all.

Tosafot (Beitzah, loc. cit.) differs and explains that for the performance of a labor to be allowed by the Torah, it must in some way contribute to the pleasure of the holiday. Otherwise, it is forbidden. According to this conception, all the thirty-nine labors forbidden on the Sabbath are prohibited on the holidays as well. There is, however, special dispensation to perform these labors when doing so will increase our holiday pleasure.

The Maggid Mishneh interprets the Rambam's citation of the expression "servile labor" as an indication that he follows the perspective shared by Rashi and the Ramban. Other authorities (e.g., the Lechem Mishneh and the Pri Chadash) do not agree with the Maggid Mishneh's interpretation and explain that the Rambam favors the other position. [See also the Chemdat Yisrael, who explains that the Rambam's statements in Sefer HaMitzvot (Negative Commandment 328) do not concur with the Maggid Mishneh's conception of the Rambam's position.] Note the treatment of this subject in the Or Sameach and in Likkutei Sichot, Vol. XI. (See also the notes on Halachah 4.) with the exception of those labors necessary for [the preparation of] food, as [implied by Exodus 12:16]: "Only that [labor] from which all souls will eat [may you perform]."

2. Anyone who rests from "servile labor" on one of these days fulfills a positive commandment,³Sefer HaMitzvot (Positive Commandments 159-160, 162-163, 166-167) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvot 297, 300, 308, 310, 318, 321) include these six in the reckoning of the Torah's 613 mitzvot. for [the Torah] describes them as Sabbaths - i.e., days of rest.⁴Note Sefer HaMitzvot (Positive Commandment 159), which in addition to the term shabbaton, "day of rest," also mentions the phrase mikra kodesh, "holy convocation," as indicating that one is commanded to sanctify the day by ceasing to perform labor.

Whoever performs a labor that is not for the sake of [the preparation of] food on one of these days - e.g., he builds, destroys, weaves, or the like⁵I.e., any of the 28 of the 39 labors forbidden on the Sabbath that do not involve the preparation of food. (See Hilchot Shabbat 7:1.) - negates [the performance of] a positive commandment and violates a negative commandment⁶Sefer HaMitzvot (Negative Commandments 323-326, 328-329) and Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvot 298, 301, 309, 311, 319 and 323) include these six in the reckoning of the Torah's 613 mitzvot., as [Leviticus 23:7] states: "You shall not perform any servile labor," and [Exodus 12:6] states: "You shall not perform any work on them."

If a person performs [a forbidden labor when observed] by witnesses and [after] receiving a warning, the Torah prescribes that he receive lashes [as punishment].⁷This is the minimum punishment given for the violation of a negative commandment that involves a deed.

3. When a person performs several forbidden labors on a holiday after being warned once - e.g., he sows, builds, destroys, and weaves - after receiving a single warning,⁸Pesachim 48a, moreover, states that even if a person is given separate warnings for each forbidden labor, each activity is not considered to be a separate violation. he receives only a single [set of] lashes. There is a distinction between the categories of forbidden labor on the Sabbath, but there is no such distinction on the holidays.⁹The Rambam is referring to the ruling (Hilchot Shabbat 7:7-8) that requires a person who performs activities that fall into two different categories of forbidden labor on the Sabbath to bring two different sin offerings. The performance of an activity from each category of forbidden labor is considered to be a separate violation. Such a distinction does not apply with regard to the performance of forbidden labors on the holidays.

4. A person may be [punished by] lashes for performing on a holiday any labor for which he is liable on the Sabbath, if it is not necessary for the preparation of food, with the exception of the transfer of articles from one domain to another and the kindling of a fire.¹⁰The Maggid Mishneh explains the Rambam's position as follows: All the labors forbidden on the Sabbath that involve preparation of food are not prohibited on the holidays. In addition, there are two forbidden labors, kindling a flame and transferring articles, which do not necessarily involve the preparation of food. Nevertheless, since they are sometimes necessary for the preparation of food, they are permitted without any restriction.

Other authorities (e.g., Pri Chadash, Pri Megadim) interpret the Rambam's statements as meaning that even the forbidden labors involved with the preparation of food are permitted only for that purpose. If, however, one performs one of these labors for other reasons - e.g., one cooks food solely to give to animals - one is liable. Moreover, if one performs a forbidden labor that is not usually involved in the preparation of food for the purpose of preparing food, one is liable.

There is a third interpretation, that of the Mabit. (In his Responsum 124, however, he follows the second view.) According to the view he expresses in Kiryat Sefer, even if one performs a forbidden labor (that is not usually involved in the preparation of food) for the purpose of preparing food, one is not liable. As proof, he cites the example of making cheese, an act that the Rambam (Hilchot Shabbat 10:13) considers a derivative of the forbidden labor of building. Nevertheless, making cheese on a holiday is not considered a violation of a forbidden labor and is forbidden only as a sh'vut.

[With regard to these two forbidden labors, an exception is made.¹¹The reason for these two exceptions is as follows: Both are often involved in the preparation of food. Alternatively, the transfer of articles is considered "an inferior labor" (Tosafot, Beitzah 12a), and Exodus 35:3: "Do not kindle fire... on the Sabbath day," is interpreted also as an exclusion, indicating that kindling fire is forbidden on the Sabbath, but not on holidays.] Since it is permitted to transfer articles for the sake of [the preparation of] food [on holidays], [this activity] was permitted even when it is not necessary for [the preparation of] food. Therefore, it is permitted to transfer an infant, a Torah scroll, a key, or the like from one domain to another. Similarly, it is permitted to kindle a fire, even though it is not for the purpose of [the preparation of] food.¹²As mentioned in the notes on Halachah 1, Tosafot requires that the activity bring a person some pleasure. This view is also reflected in the Ra'avad's gloss.

With regard to the other forbidden labors, [the following principles apply:] Whenever the activity is necessary for [the preparation of] food - e.g., slaughter, baking, kneading, or the like - it is permitted. If it is not necessary for [the preparation of] food - e.g., writing, weaving, building, and the like - it is forbidden.

5. Whenever it is possible to perform a labor on the day prior to the holiday without causing any loss or inadequacy, our Sages forbade¹³The Maggid Mishneh quotes the Ra'avad as stating that this prohibition has its source in the Torah itself. Indeed, the Jerusalem Talmud (Beitzah 1:10) and certain passages in the Babylonian Talmud (Shabbat 95a; Chaggigah 18a) support this view. Nevertheless, most later authorities accept the Rambam's view that the prohibition is Rabbinic in origin. performing such a labor on the holiday itself, even if it is performed for the sake of [the preparation of] food.

Why was this forbidden? This was a decree [instituted], lest a person leave for the holiday all the labors that he could have performed before the holiday, and thus spend the entire holiday performing those labors. Thus, he will be prevented from rejoicing on the holidays and will not have the opportunity to [take pleasure in] eating and drinking.¹⁴The Ra'avad gives a different rationale: that the extra effort involved in the performance of these activities is out of place on a holiday.

6. For this very reason, [our Sages] did not forbid transferring articles on a holiday, although the transfer of all [articles] is a task that could be performed before the holiday.

Why was this not forbidden? To increase our festive joy, so that a person can send and bring anything he desires, and thus fulfill his wants, and not feel like someone whose hands are tied.¹⁵The Ra'avad differs with the extent of the leniency granted by the Rambam, restricting it to sending containers and food. He also differs regarding the rationale, explaining that sending the articles on the holiday is a greater expression of honor and respect. The Rambam's ruling is quoted by the later authorities. With regard to other labors that are possible to be performed on the day before the holiday, since they involve [prolonged] activity, they should not be performed on a holiday.

7. What is implied? On a holiday, we do not harvest, thresh, winnow, separate, or grind grain, nor do we sift [flour].¹⁶All these labors, although necessary for the preparation of food, are not intended for the preparation of a particular cooked dish or loaf of bread. Rather, one performs these activities for several days in advance. Therefore, our Sages desired that these activities should not be performed on the festival itself.

It must be noted that these forbidden labors are specifically mentioned in the passage from the Jerusalem Talmud cited above, which states that the prohibition against performing such activities stems from the Torah itself. For all these and any similar activities can be performed on the day prior to the holiday without causing any loss or inadequacy.

8. We may, however, knead, bake, slaughter, and cook on a holiday, since if these activities had been performed on the previous day, the taste would be adversely affected. For warm bread or food that is cooked today does not [taste] the same as bread or food that was cooked the day before. Similarly, meat that is slaughtered today does not [taste] the same as meat slaughtered on the previous day. The same rules apply in all analogous situations.¹⁷The Rambam's rationale depends on the concept of freshness. Food that is not fresh loses a certain amount of its flavor. The Ra'avad questions this principle, noting that produce harvested today is also fresher and tastier than produce harvested on the day before. Several authorities offer different observations to counter the Ra'avad's thesis.

Similarly, when it would be detrimental for subsidiary activities [involved in the preparation] of food to be performed on the day [before the holiday] - e.g., grinding spices and the like - they may be performed on the holiday.

9. It is forbidden to bake or cook food on a holiday [that one intends] to eat during the week,¹⁸See Tz'ror HaChayim, which mentions various opinions concerning whether this prohibition has its origin in the Torah itself or in Rabbinic decree. In conclusion, he favors the opinion that the prohibition is Scriptural in origin. (See also Halachah 15.) The doubt exists only with regard to the Rambam's position. Tosafot and others maintain that the prohibition is Scriptural in origin (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 503:1). because work necessary for [the preparation of] food was permitted solely so that pleasure could be derived from it on a holiday. If, however, one [cooks food] to be eaten on the holiday, and there is food left over, the remainder may be eaten during the week.¹⁹If, however, one cooked food on a holiday with the intent of eating it on the following day, many authorities (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 503:13) allow the food to be eaten after the holiday. (See also Halachah 11 and notes.)

10. A woman may fill a pot with meat although she needs only one piece.²⁰The reason is that the meat is tastier when cooked with many pieces together (Maggid Mishneh). A baker may fill an entire drum with water [to boil] although he needs only one jug.²¹This gives us a second rationale for the leniency of preparing a larger quantity of food than one needs immediately: when, as in the instance mentioned, there is no extra work involved in preparing a large quantity as compared to a small quantity. If either of these two rationales applies, leniency may be taken and the extra amount prepared.

Once, however, the water is left to boil, an additional amount may not be added (Ramah, Orach Chayim 103:2). And a woman may bake an entire oven full of bread although she needs only a single loaf, for when there is a large quantity of bread in an an oven, it bakes better.²²Rabbenu Yonah explains that this applied in Talmudic times, when the ovens were small. In such an instance, a large number of loaves were placed in the oven at the same time, and it took longer for them to bake, producing a better flavor. If, as was the case with regard to the larger ovens used in the medieval period, adding to the number of loaves does not increase the flavor, it is forbidden to do so. (See Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 507:6.)

[Similarly,] a person may salt several pieces of meat²³The salting is intended to drain off the blood so that it is permitted to cook the meat, as stated in Hilchot Ma'achalot Asurot, Chapter 6. although he only needs one piece.²⁴Here, also, the leniency is granted because there is no additional difficulty in salting the other pieces. Alternatively, the leniency is allowed so that the remainder of the meat will not spoil. Compare to Chapter 3, Halachah 4. The same applies in all similar situations.

11. When a person cooks or bakes on a holiday with the intent of eating the food on that day, or he has invited guests and they did not come, and cooked food or bread remains, [the food] is permitted to be eaten on the following day, whether it is a weekday or the Sabbath,²⁵As explained in Chapter 6, just as it is forbidden to prepare food on a holiday for a weekday that follows, our Sages forbade preparing food on a holiday for a Sabbath that follows directly after the holiday, or for the second day of the holiday itself. Nevertheless, as explained in that chapter, our Sages did provide the leniency of establishing an eruv tavshilin. provided one does not act with guile.²⁶I.e., invite guests although he knows that they will not come, or prepare a large quantity of food when one knows that one will be unable to eat it all, and then use the remainder for the following day.

Shulchan Aruch HaRav 503:7 notes that it has become common practice to cook a meal for the night of the second day of a holiday on the afternoon of the first day, relying on the leniency that one will taste some of the food. He criticizes this practice and explains that women should be taught to discontinue it and prepare the food before the commencement of the holiday.

If, however, one acts with guile, he²⁷He and the members of his family may not partake of it; other Jews, however, are not restricted (Mishnah Berurah 527:79). is forbidden [to partake of the food], even on a Sabbath that follows the holiday. For greater stringency is shown with one who acts with guile than with one who violates the prohibition [against preparing food for the following day on a holiday] intentionally.²⁸The rationale for this stringency is that the example shown by a person with guile might be copied by others, while few will emulate brazen transgression. Moreover, even with regard to the person himself, if he were not punished, a person who acts with guile would never really appreciate the seriousness of his transgression, and would repeat it. When, however, a person willfully violates the Sages' decree, he will not be able to rationalize his conduct. Hence, there is the possibility he will recognize his error (Rashi, Beitzah 17b; Mishnah Berurah 527:78).

12. A person who has an animal that is dangerously ill²⁹We are speaking about an instance where the person has already eaten, and hence would not ordinarily consider slaughtering the animal. Nevertheless, because it is dangerously ill, he fears that it will die before the conclusion of the holiday. Our Sages were fearful that he would slaughter the animal regardless, rather than suffer the loss of having it die without ritual slaughter. They therefore established directives that would allow slaughter in most instances (Maggid Mishneh; Rashi, Beitzah 25a). (See also Chapter 6, Halachah 10.) should not slaughter it on a holiday unless he knows that he will be able to eat³⁰Although the Rambam's wording might be interpreted as indicating that it is necessary to eat at least this amount of meat, the Maggid Mishneh and the later halachic authorities (Shulchan Aruch Harav 498:11; Mishnah Berurah 498:34) explain that it is not necessary to partake of the meat on the holiday. [at least] an olive-sized [portion] of roasted meat before the holiday is completed. [In this way,] he will not be slaughtering [an animal] on a holiday to partake of its meat on an ordinary day. The same principles apply in other similar situations.

13. We may not bake and cook on a holiday in order to feed gentiles³¹See the Mishnah Berurah 512:2, which states that a Jew who worships false gods or desecrates the Sabbath is considered like a gentile in this regard. or dogs, as [indicated by Exodus 12:16]:³²The Rambam's citation of a verse from the Torah as a proof-text for this prohibition is interpreted as an indication that he follows the position (see the notes on Halachot 1 and 4) that the labors necessary to prepare food are forbidden by the Torah on the holiday unless one is preparing food for a Jew. As mentioned, others consider the prohibitions to be Rabbinic in origin. "This alone is permitted for you" - i.e., [the leniency is] "for you" and not for gentiles, "for you" and not for dogs.

For this reason, it is permitted to invite a gentile [to share one's meal] on the Sabbath, but not on a holiday, lest one add [more food] for him.³³This rationale is not applicable on the Sabbath, for then it is not permitted to cook at all. If, however, a gentile comes [to a Jewish household on a holiday] on his own initiative, he may eat [the food] they eat together with them, for it has already been prepared.

14. On a holiday, it is permissible to slaughter an animal that is owned partially by a Jew and partially by a gentile. [This is permitted although the gentile benefits,] because it is impossible [for the Jew] to partake of an olive-sized portion [of the meat belonging to him] without slaughtering the animal.

When, by contrast, dough is owned partially by a Jew and partially by a gentile, it is forbidden to bake it [on a holiday], because the dough can be divided.

[The following rule applies when] the soldiers [of a gentile army] give flour to a Jew and request that he bake them bread on a holiday: If they do not object to giving some of the bread to a baby, it is permitted for him to bake on the holiday. For every loaf of bread is fit to be given to the baby.³⁴I.e., as long as a portion of the loaf can be given to a baby, one is not cooking solely for the gentiles.

The Maggid Mishneh notes that many (e.g., Tur, Orach Chayim 512) have objected to the Rambam's ruling, based on Beitzah 21a, which appears to establish a correlation between the permission to bake bread for these soldiers and the laws mentioned in the previous halachah regarding inviting gentiles as guests. It appears from that passage that the Sages who forbid inviting guests also forbid baking bread for the soldiers, for the same principle is involved: one is cooking additional food for a gentile.

The Maggid Mishneh, however, explains that there is no contradiction and that the two views can be reconciled. The Jew can be considered to be baking for the sake of the child. For if he did not bake for the soldiers, they would not allow him to bake for the child.

The Rishon LeTzion amplifies the difference between the two situations, explaining that because the person is not baking solely for the gentiles, the prohibition against doing so is merely Rabbinic in origin and can be waived with regard to baking for a gentile army, since the person could suffer substantial financial loss if he refused. In contrast, when inviting guests, one does so on one's own volition, with no loss involved.

As emphasized by Shulchan Aruch HaRav 512:6, this leniency was granted only in this situation, because of the risk of confrontation with the military authorities. One should not apply it to other circumstances. (See also Mishnah Berurah 512:15.)

When the shepherds also eat from the loaves they give to the dogs, these loaves may be baked on a holiday.³⁵Here also, since one is not baking solely for the dogs, one may bake the bread on a holiday. Although one is adding to the loaf one is baking for the dogs, since it would be possible to satisfy them by giving them meat, it appears that the shepherds are baking the loaf because they want to partake of it themselves (Maggid Mishneh).

As emphasized by the Mishnah Berurah 512:22, this leniency applies even when one has no other food immediately available for the dogs.

15. A person who cooks on a holiday for gentiles, for an animal or to keep for a weekday should not be given lashes, because if guests came, the cooked food would be fit to serve them.³⁶The Rambam's wording appears to indicate that although the activity is forbidden by the Torah, punishment is not given, because it is possible that his activity might ultimately serve a permitted purpose. If a person prepares [food] for himself and [food] remains, he is permitted to give it to a gentile or to an animal.

16. Bathing and anointing³⁷The Maggid Mishneh states that anointing oneself is mentioned because it is often necessary to heat oil used to anoint oneself. Anointing oneself with cold oil for pleasure is permitted even on the Sabbath (Hilchot Shabbat 21:23). oneself are considered in the general category of eating and drinking. They are permitted on a holiday [as indicated by Exodus 12:16]: "Only that [labor] from which all souls will eat [may you perform]" - i.e., all the needs of the body [are permitted].³⁸The Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah (Beitzah 2:5) explains that the Hebrew יאכל has the connotation of all physical pleasure, not necessarily merely eating or drinking. Note the explanation in Sefer HaMitzvot, negative commandment 187.(See also the Yereim, section 113.)

Therefore, one may heat water on a holiday and wash his hands and feet. It is, however, forbidden to wash one's entire body. This is a decree,³⁹The Jerusalem Talmud (Shabbat 3:3) appears to indicate that the prohibition has its source in the Torah itself. Although Tosafot (Shabbat 39b) accept this view, Rabbenu Yitzchak Alfasi and the Rashba differ and maintain that this prohibition is a Rabbinical decree. [instituted to prevent the use of] bathhouses.⁴⁰As the Rambam explains in Hilchot Shabbat 22:2, our Sages instituted restrictions against bathing on the Sabbath because the attendants would heat up the water on the Sabbath and claim that they had done so on the preceding day. On holidays, although the rules are more lenient, certain restrictions remain. For a discussion concerning the laws of ritual immersion on a holiday, see the notes on Hilchot Shabbat 23:8.

When water was heated before the commencement of a holiday, one may wash one's entire body with it on the holiday.⁴¹Based on the position of Tosafot mentioned previously, the Ramah (Orach Chayim 511:2) forbids washing one's entire body on a holiday as a safeguard, even when the water was heated before the commencement of the holiday. The subsequent Ashkenazic authorities accepted the Ramah's ruling, but were slightly more lenient and allowed washing one's entire body, portion by portion. Greater leniency is, however, shown with regard to washing a baby. This was prohibited only on the Sabbath.⁴²See Hilchot Shabbat, loc. cit.

17. All [activities] that are forbidden on the Sabbath, whether because they resemble a [forbidden] labor, might lead to a forbidden labor, or are placed in the category of sh'vut,⁴³See Hilchot Shabbat, Chapters 21-23, which list activities forbidden by the Sages for every category of forbidden labor. are forbidden on a holiday unless they are necessary for the preparation of food and the like, or for other purposes that are permitted on a holiday, as will be explained in these laws.

Everything that is forbidden to be carried on the Sabbath,⁴⁴See Hilchot Shabbat, Chapters 25 and 26. is forbidden to be carried on a holiday, except for the purpose [of the preparation] of food and the like. Whatever [activities] may be carried out on the Sabbath may be carried on the holidays. There is, however, [a category of prohibitions] that apply on the holidays, but do not apply on the Sabbath: the prohibitions against muktzeh.⁴⁵The term muktzeh as popularly used with regard to the Sabbath prohibitions is not a precise application of the term. Muktzeh literally means "set aside." As used in the context here, it applies to articles that a person did not intend to use on a holiday. Rather, he "set them aside" to be used in the future.

As the Rambam explains in the following halachah, on the Sabbath it is not necessary to have a specific intention to use an object on the Sabbath. As long as there is no reason that prevents one from using it on that day - e.g., the prohibitions mentioned in Hilchot Shabbat, Chapters 25 and 26 - one may carry it on the Sabbath.

Muktzeh is forbidden on a holiday, but permitted on the Sabbath. [The rationale is] since the [restrictions pertaining to] the holidays are more lenient than those of the Sabbath, [our Sages] forbade muktzeh, lest one come to treat the holidays with disrespect.⁴⁶The Ra'avad differs and states that there are authorities who maintain that articles that are muktzeh are permitted to be carried on holidays. The Rambam's view is quoted by the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 495:4), while the Tur and the Ramah cite the more lenient view. Shulchan Aruch HaRav 495:13 states that although it is customary to follow the more lenient view, it would be preferable to follow the more stringent ruling.

18. What is implied? When a chicken is set aside to lay eggs, an ox is set aside to plow, and doves in a dovecote⁴⁷See Chapter 2, Halachah 5. or produce are set aside for sale, these and any similar articles are considered to be muktzeh and may not be eaten on a holiday.

[For them to be permitted,] it is necessary to prepare them on the previous day and have the intent that one will partake of them.⁴⁸See Chapter 2, Halachah 9. On the Sabbath, by contrast, everything is considered to be prepared and there is no need for preparation.

Just as muktzeh is forbidden on a holiday, so too, an object that first came into existence on the holiday is forbidden.

19. [Food] may be prepared⁴⁹The preparation we are speaking about here is preparation through natural means, and not preparation accomplished by man through performance of labor. As mentioned previously in the chapter, it is forbidden to perform any activities on a holiday that involve the preparation of food for the days that follow. (See the Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, Beitzah 1:1.) on a weekday for the Sabbath and [food] may be prepared on a weekday for a holiday, but [food] may not be prepared on a holiday for the Sabbath, nor may [food] be prepared on the Sabbath for a holiday.

Therefore, an egg that was laid on a holiday that follows the Sabbath is forbidden⁵⁰Based on Pesachim 47a, several Rabbis (Ramban; Shulchan Aruch HaRav 513:1; Mishnah Berurah 513:1) maintain that the prohibition against nolad is Scriptural in origin.

In his Commentary on the Mishnah (loc. cit.), by contrast, the Rambam explicitly states that it is a Rabbinic decree. Nevertheless, since the Commentary on the Mishnah was not widely studied, different perspectives about the Rambam's view have been offered, including that of the Minchat Chinuch (Mitzvah 295), who states that the Rambam would require a person to be punished by lashes for eating such an egg. - even though the chicken is set aside to be eaten⁵¹If the chicken is not set aside to be eaten on the holiday, the egg is forbidden regardless, because of the prohibition against muktzeh (Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, loc. cit.). - since the egg was finished on the previous day and thus the Sabbath would be preparing for a holiday.

[Our Sages] forbade [eating] an egg that was laid on any holiday. [This is] a decree, [lest one eat an egg laid] on a holiday that follows the Sabbath. Similarly, [our Sages] forbade [eating] an egg that was laid on any Sabbath. [This is] a decree, lest one eat an egg laid] on a Sabbath that follows a holiday.⁵²There is no prohibition against eating an egg laid on a weekday that follows a holiday or on a Sunday. Since weekday meals are not significant, we are not concerned that a holiday or a Sabbath prepares for them.

20. Just as it is forbidden to partake of this [egg], so too, is it forbidden to carry it.⁵³The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 513:1) state: "It is forbidden to touch it." Although the prohibition is ordinarily against moving muktzeh, and touching it is permitted, the prohibition is made more severe in the present instance because an egg is round, and even the slightest touch is likely to cause it to roll. Even if it becomes mixed with a thousand [other eggs], they are all forbidden. For on the morrow, they will all be permitted, and [the existence of] any forbidden article that will ultimately become permitted is never considered inconsequential, even when mixed with thousands of thousands.⁵⁴Generally, when a forbidden substance becomes mixed with a permitted substance, the presence of the forbidden substance is considered inconsequential (and the mixture permitted) when the taste of the forbidden substance can no longer be recognized, or when it is mixed with more than sixty times its weight of permitted food.

More stringent rulings are made, however, with regard to a forbidden substance that will ultimately become permitted (davar sheyesh lo matirin). The rationale is that since the entire mixture will be permitted within a short time, there is no reason to seek leniencies and partake of it while a portion (although inconsequential) is forbidden (Hilchot Ma'achalot Asurot, chapter 15).

When a person slaughters a chicken on a holiday and within the chicken finds eggs that already have a shell, it is permitted [to partake of] them, for this is not a frequent circumstance. And [our Sages] did not institute decrees regarding infrequent circumstances that occur only incidentally.⁵⁵The decrees our Sages instituted were meant to serve as safeguards, and a safeguard is necessary only when a situation occurs frequently.

21. Our celebration of every holiday for two days in the diaspora is merely a custom.⁵⁶See Hilchot Kiddush HaChodesh 5:5, which explains that in the time when the calendar was established on the basis of the testimony of witnesses, the observance of the second day of a holiday in the distant diaspora was necessary because of a doubt regarding the days on which the holidays were to be celebrated. Nevertheless, in the present era, when we use a fixed calendar, the observance of the second day of a holiday in the diaspora is merely a custom. (See also Chapter 6, Halachah 14.) For the second day of the holiday is a Rabbinic institution, innovated during the exile. The inhabitants of Eretz Yisrael observe a holiday for two days only on Rosh HaShanah.⁵⁷As explained in Hilchot Kiddush HaChodesh 5:7, even when the calendar was established on the basis of the testimony of witnesses, Rosh HaShanah was generally observed for two days throughout Eretz Yisrael. Since it is forbidden to travel beyond 2000 cubits on a holiday, only those living in the immediate vicinity of Jerusalem had the possibility of knowing whether or not the new month had been sanctified.

In Hilchot Kiddush HaChodesh in this volume the fundamental principles pertaining to this custom and the rationale why Rosh HaShanah is universally observed for two days will be explained.

22. Although the second day of a holiday is merely a Rabbinic institution, everything that is forbidden on the first day is forbidden on the second. Whoever desecrates the second day of a holiday, even the second day of Rosh HaShanah,⁵⁸The word "even" has attracted the attention of the commentaries for, as mentioned in Halachah 24, the observance of the second day of Rosh HaShanah is more severe than that of the second day of other holidays. The Lechem Mishneh explains that the intent is that even the observance of the second day of Rosh HaShanah does not warrant a more severe punishment. whether with regard to a prohibition in the category of sh'vut, the performance of a forbidden labor, or by proceeding beyond the [2000-cubit city] limits should be punished by stripes for rebelliousness or should be placed under a ban of ostracism,⁵⁹See Hilchot Talmud Torah, Chapters 6 and 7. unless [the violator] was a student [of the Torah].⁶⁰The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 496:1) quotes the Tur, who states "If [the violator] is a Torah scholar, we do not punish him so severely as to place him under a ban of ostracism. He is to be beaten." (See Sha'ar HaTziyun 496:5, which focuses on the difference between these two rulings.)

Just as it is forbidden to deliver eulogies or to fast on the first day of a holiday and we are obligated to rejoice on that day,⁶¹See Chapter 6, Halachah 17. so too, [these same prohibitions and obligations apply] on the second day. There is no difference between them except with regard to [the care of] a corpse.

23. What is implied? On the first day of a holiday gentiles should be involved⁶²There is a difference of opinion among the Rabbis whether only the actual burial and those activities that involve performance of a forbidden labor must be performed by gentiles, or whether this involves all activities associated with the burial, including the ritual purification of the body, dressing it in shrouds and the like.

The Maggid Mishneh explains that all activities associated with the burial must be performed by a gentile. The Hagahot Maimoniot, by contrast, maintain that any activity that does not actually involve a forbidden labor should be performed by a Jew. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 526:1) follows this view. with the burial of a corpse,⁶³Rashi (Shabbat 139b) and the Baal Halachot Gedolot explain that the leniency of allowing gentiles to bury a Jew on a holiday was instituted as a token of respect for the human body, the repository of the soul. If the body were left unburied, it would decompose and become an aspersion to the dignity of mankind. Therefore, they maintain that if the corpse is not likely to decompose, it should not be buried by gentiles.

Rabbenu Asher and others differ and maintain that the mitzvah of burying the corpse on the day the person dies is the source for this ruling (see Hilchot Sanhedrin 15:8). Therefore, even when the body is not likely to decompose, it should be buried on the first day. The Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit. 526:1) follows this view. and on the second day these activities should be performed by a Jew.⁶⁴The Tur and the Ramah (loc. cit.:4) mention a custom practiced by Rabbenu Tam, which equates the first and second days of a holiday in this regard. The Ramah agrees to this custom when it is possible to find a gentile to perform these labors, but maintains that if it is impossible to perform these labors, they should be performed by Jews.

In practice at present, in some observant communities burials are conducted on the holidays. Nevertheless, the prevailing custom at large - particularly when burying the dead might lead to the unnecessary violation of the laws of the holidays by some - is to postpone the burial until the following day.

Everything necessary [for the burial] may be performed - e.g., making a bier, sewing shrouds, picking herbs, and the like. With regard to a corpse, the second day of a holiday is considered to be an ordinary weekday. This applies even to the second day of Rosh HaShanah.

24. The two days observed in the diaspora are considered two separate expressions of holiness and are not considered to be a single [extended] day.⁶⁵Originally, the observance of the holidays for two days came as a result of doubt: If the first day was actually the holiday, the second day was an ordinary day. Conversely, if the second day was actually the holiday, the first day was an ordinary day. Therefore, they were considered to be two different expressions of holiness. (See Chapter 6, Halachah 12.) Therefore, an entity that was considered muktzeh on the first day, or first came into existence on the first day, is permitted on the second day if it was designated [for use on that day].

What is implied? An egg that was laid on the first day of a holiday may be eaten on the second. [Similarly,] beast or fowl that were trapped on the first day may be eaten on the second day. [Produce] that was attached to the ground on the first day and separated from it [on that day] may be eaten on the second day. Similarly, one may paint one's eyes on the second day,⁶⁶The Ramah (Orach Chayim 496:2) interprets this as referring to an irritation that does not involve any danger. As such, tending to it by a Jew is forbidden on the first day of a holiday. On the second day, because it brings a person relief from pain, leniency is shown. The same law applies to all other remedies of this nature. even though one does not feel infirmity.

When does the above apply? To the second days of holidays observed [only] in the diaspora. The two days of Rosh HaShanah are considered to be a single expression of holiness; they are considered to be one [long] day⁶⁷Since they were universally observed, even within Eretz Yisrael. with regard to all matters, with the exception of [burying] the dead. An egg that is laid on the first day of Rosh HaShanah is forbidden on the second day. The same applies in all similar instances.

When either the Sabbath or a holiday follows directly after the other, an egg laid on one is forbidden on the other. The same applies with regard to all similar situations.⁶⁸I.e., all instances of nolad. Even if an egg was laid on the second day [of a holiday, and that second day] is followed by the Sabbath, the egg should not be eaten on the Sabbath.