Study Beitzah folio 4B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Had I issued a ruling for you then, I would have forgotten the correct response, and I would have said to you, based on the accepted principle that in the case of a dispute between Rav and R' Yoḥanan, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of R' Yoḥanan, that the eggs are permitted. However
§ R' Yoḥanan said: With regard to branches that fell from a palm tree on Shabbat, it is prohibited to kindle them on a Festival that occurs the next day. And do not reply to me by asking why I permit an egg to be eaten on the following day. What is the reason for the distinction between the two cas
Rav Mattana said: With regard to branches that fell from a palm tree directly into an oven on a Festival, one may add to those branches wood prepared from the previous day, which may be used for kindling, and kindle them all together. The Talmud asks: But doesn’t he turn over and move the prohibite
The Talmud challenges this: But doesn’t he thereby nullify a prohibited item ab initio, by adding permitted wood to the pieces of wood that fell into the oven, which are prohibited? And we learned in a Mishnah (see Terumot 5:9): One may not nullify a prohibited item ab initio. The Talmud answers:
The Talmud asks: And according to the opinion of Rav Ashi, who said: Any object whose prohibition is temporary, even if the prohibition applies by rabbinic law, it cannot be nullified, what is there to say? Doesn’t Rav Ashi agree that it is permitted to kindle the wood after the Festival? The Talm