The power of leniency is preferable TB Beitza 2

 With daf TB Beitza 2 we begin a brand-new massekhet. Up to now all the holiday tractates we’ve studied dealt with the specific laws concerning that holiday. For example, in massekhet Pesakhim we studied the laws concerning the Paschal Lamb and the Seder night. In massekhet Sukkah we studied the laws concerning the building of a sukkah and the laws of the lulav and etrog. Massekhet Beitza deals with general laws of festivals that apply to all the holidays. Our massekhet could easily have been called massekhet Yom Tov (a Festival), but was given the name Beitza, an egg in Hebrew, because of the first major word of the first Mishna. “With regard to an egg that was laid on a Festival” (Sefaria.org translation)

The rules of a Festival are very similar to the rules of Shabbat when it comes to the prohibition of work. Nevertheless, there are some differences. Sometimes the sages were more lenient when comes to a Festival in order to increase a person’s joy on Yom Tov. Sometimes the sages were more stringent when comes to a Festival lest a person come to it treated with contempt.

While analyzing what exactly is the case in our Mishna, the Gemara says something amazing. The first attempt to explain the Mishna’s case describes the chicken under discussion as a chicken that is designated for the purpose of laying eggs and not being thought of that night’s supper. Since the chicken and the egg were not part of the pre-Shabbat preparation, the debate between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel revolves around the scope of muktze (מוקצה). In this case Beit Shammai holds the lenient position (it may be eaten) and Beit Hillel holds the more strict position (it may not be eaten). “The Gemara raises an objection: And let them disagree with regard to a chicken, rather than an egg, to convey the far-reaching nature of the opinion of Beit Hillel, who prohibit its use even in the more lenient case of muktze. And if you say it is better to present the dispute as in the mishna, so as to clarify the more lenient opinion, as the strength of leniency is preferable (כֹּחַ דְּהֶתֵּירָא עֲדִיף) (Berakhot 60a), there is another option: And let them disagree with regard to both of these cases.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Rashi explains why the strength of leniency is preferable. “It is better to listen to the strength of those who permit because that person relies upon his learning and is not afraid to be lenient. However the power to forbid is not a proof because everybody is able to be strict even in matters where it is permitted.” (My translation)

Any Tom, Dick, or Herschel can add stringencies upon stringencies. In fact for those who are committed to Jewish law find being easier being strict than being lenient when comes to religious matters. By being strict in all cases one doesn’t have to think or reason in order to feel safe that he/she hasn’t violated Jewish law. When I was a rabbinical student my teacher Dr. Jose Faur, who taught me the laws concerning kashrut, once said that Jews are more stringent concerning the laws of kashrut when they don’t have to be.” We have to remember just because the position is lenient doesn’t make the position forbidden according to Jewish law.