Shevitat Yom Tov - Chapter 3

See the final halachah of the previous chapter.

In contrast to a behemah -a domesticated animal—(e.g. a cow, sheep, or goat), when a fowl or wild animal (e.g., a deer) is slaughtered, its blood must be covered with earth. (See Hilchot Shechitah, Chapter 14.)

See the notes on the final halachah of the previous chapter, which touch on this issue.

Most authorities consider this to be referring to an animal that is a crossbreed between a goat and a deer.

The Ramah (Orach Chayim 498:18) states that this ruling applies only when the person slaughtered this animal in a corner. If, however, he slaughtered it in the middle of a courtyard and earth has been prepared and is available, it is permitted to cover its blood on the holiday, just as it is permitted to remove an unpleasant object from sight.

In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Bikkurim 2:9), the Rambam writes that it is forbidden to take this earth, because there is a doubt regarding the animal’s classification. This can be interpreted as an indication that even if earth was prepared for use, it may be carried only for a valid reason.

As the Rambam explains in Hilchot Ma’achalot Asurot 7:3, we are forbidden to eat only the fat of cows, sheep, and goats. The fat of all other kosher animals and beasts is permitted. Since the animal in question could be considered to be a goat, it is forbidden to eat its fat.

Although it is necessary to cover the blood of the beast or fowl, it is not necessary to cover the blood of the domestic animal.

Shulchan Aruch HaRav 498:36 and the Mishnah Berurah 498:103 explain that “one shovelful” need not be interpreted literally. The intent is that one would not have to engage in any additional effort to cover the extra blood coming from the animal.

This is the key to the leniency. Since one would normally cut the wool away with shears, pulling it away by hand represents a departure from one’s ordinary procedure and is therefore permitted.

See Hilchot Shabbat 11 :5.

A hide from an animal slaughtered on a holiday, in contrast to the hide of an animal slaughtered before the holiday began (Maggid Mishneh; Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 499:3).

By the people’s treading on it, the tanning process will begin, and it will not spoil.

Similarly, one is permitted to place it in the shade or in a cool place so that it will not spoil (Shulchan Aruch HaRav 499:3; Mishnah Berurah 499:4).

Because of the fear that its hide will spoil. Our Sages feared that this financial loss would deter a person from slaughtering an animal on the holiday.

The Rambam describes the difference between the manner in which meat is salted for cooking and for roasting in Hilchot Ma’ achalot Asurot 6:12.

Shulchan Aruch Harav 499:10 permits the fats to be carried to a cool shady place, lest their loss prevent the person from slaughtering.

To cut the meat in such a way that it will be easier for a customer to carry it home (Rashi, Beitzah 28a).

To distinguish meat purchased by one customer from that purchased by another (ibid.).

Although the School of Shammai forbids this, the halachah follows the School of Hillel, which rules that baking such a loaf is permitted (Beitzah 22b). The rationale is that a loaf tastes better when cooked in an oven which is full.

Numbers 15:20 requires us to separate a portion of dough and give it to the priest as challah. This offering is governed by the rules pertaining to terumah and hence may not be eaten when either the dough or the person partaking of it is impure. In such an instance, it must be burned.

On a holiday, one may, however, bring a priest challah that had been separated before the holiday (Chapter 4, Halachah 26; Ramah, Orach Chayim 506:3). The Ramah also mentions that in the present age, in the diaspora, dough that has been kneaded before the holiday is permitted to be baked on the holiday, and a small portion of bread is left over, from which challah will be separated on the following day.

lt is ordinarily forbidden to separate the consecrated articles that are due the priests on a holiday (Chapter 4, Halachah 26). Nevertheless, an exception was made in this instance, to allow people the option of eating fresh bread on a holiday.

This is the ruling that must be followed in the prese1_1t age, for we are all ritually impure, and convey ritual impurity to the dough.

See Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim 19:5.

See Chapter 1, Halachah 2.

The Noda Biy’hudah (Vol. 11, Orach Chayim, Responsum 96) notes that according to Hilchot Pesulei HaMukdashim, loc. cit., it is also forbidden to burn certain sacrificial meats that became disqualified—e.g., piggul and notar—at night. The Rambam does not mention such a restriction, however, with regard to consecrated articles that become impure.
There are, nevertheless, other authorities who differ and forbid the burning at night of consecrated articles that have become impure. (See Be’ur Halachah 506 and the sources mentioned there.)

Our translation follows the Rambam’s Commentary on the Mishnah (Beitzah 4:5). Beitzah 32b and the Shulchan Aruch (Otach Chayim 507:4) speak of an instance where a brick or part of the lime covering of the oven wall fell and disturbed the cooking process.

By hand (Rambam’s Commentary on the Mishnah, loc. cit.), seemingly implying that it is forbidden to use a utensil unless necessary.

The Maggid Mishneh states that this is permitted even though in the process one will extinguish the coals. Although Chapter 4, Halachah 2, states that it is forbidden to extinguish a fire on a holiday, it is possible to explain that a distinction can be made in this instance, for by extinguishing the flame it becomes possible to cook.

This follows the Rambam’s position (Hilchot Shabbat 8:16) that one is not liable for mixing clay if one uses ashes. The Ra’avad differs with the Rambam both in Hilchot Shabbat and in this halachah. The Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.:7) follows the Rambam’s view.

Contact with cold water after being heated will seal the walls of an earthenware oven.

These prohibitions are instituted because these tasks are mundane matters that are not directly associated with the preparation of food on a holiday.

All the commentaries see this as a reference to the Mishnah (Beitzah 4:7), which forbids heating “tiles.” They question why the Rambam deviated from the wording used there.

This refers to a cauldron used during the Talmudic period, made of heavy copper. It was made up of two receptacles, the upper one for water, and the lower one for the coals used to heat the water (Rambam's Commentary on the Mishnah, Shabbat 3:3). Since the cauldron is large and remains hot for a very long time, one might think that its use would be forbidden on a holiday, lest one create the impression that one is preparing hot water for the day following the holiday (Maggid Mishneh).

As mentioned in Chapter 1, Halachot 5-7, our Sages forbade the performance of any labors on a holiday even for the sake of the preparation of food, if it is possible to perform these labors before the holiday begins.

The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 504:1) states that this is forbidden because it is a mundane activity that is inappropriate for a holiday. Others explain that, as stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 7, grinding is forbidden on a holiday.

The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 504:3) states that at present, we are unaware which is considered a small grinder and which a large grinder. Therefore, it is forbidden to use all grinders.

Although he accepts the law stated by the Rambam, the Ra’avad differs with the rationale, and explains that in Eretz Yisrael it was always customary to use a small grinder. Therefore, employing one on a holiday is not considered to be a deviation from the norm.

Although there are opinions that permit removing the pebble or the sliver by hand, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 506:4 and the Mishnah Berurah 506:12 forbid removing it by hand, and require that the flour be sifted again.

If, however, the flour had not been sifted on the previous day, it may not be sifted on the holiday (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 506:2). It is, however, permissible to have a gentile sift the flour, provided he deviates from the ordinary practice (Ramah).

Our translation of these terms is taken from the Rambam’s Commentary on the Mishnah (Keilim 16:3). Most other authorities follow different interpretations.

The Maggid Mishneh explains that since it is customary to prepare a large quantity using these utensils, it appears as if the person were preparing on the holiday for the weekdays that follow.

I.e., one is thus separating the waste matter from the food.

And thus it is likely to be easier to separate the small amount of waste matter, than to separate all the food.

When the waste matter is thin and difficult to separate.

Which our Rabbis prohibited on a holiday, even when it is performed for the purpose of preparing food.

In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Shabbat 20:2), the Rambam explains that when raw eggs are mixed with coarse foods, they cause the lighter matter to rise above the heavier, coarse matter. Thus, mixing the egg with the mustard will cause the dregs of the mustard to be separated.

If, however, one does not use the filter for another purpose, one may not use it to filter wine afterwards.