Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site aecom.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!aecom!teitz From: teitz@aecom.UUCP (Eliyahu Teitz) Newsgroups: net.religion.jewish Subject: Re: Re: Re: Shabbat electricity (what is work?) Message-ID: <906@aecom.UUCP> Date: Tue, 6-Nov-84 10:06:39 EST Article-I.D.: aecom.906 Posted: Tue Nov 6 10:06:39 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 8-Nov-84 06:45:06 EST References: brl-tgr.5198 <348@wxlvax.UUCP>, <2257@rochester.UUCP> <1592@ucf-cs.UUCP> <5431@brl-tgr.ARPA> Organization: Albert Einstein Coll. of Med., NY Lines: 138 > > I would like to question the use of the term 'at once'. 'At once' in > > today's vocabulary is relative. While the original author might argue > > that any timer to defer an action would itself be caused by the action, > > the term 'at once' is a misnomer of itself. There IS a sizable delay. > > These days we can measure in picoseconds - and frequently have good > > reason to do so. So there is no distinction between a 'delay' and 'at > > once' - only a fuzzy matter of how MUCH time exceeds 'at once'. So, how > > much time DOES exceed 'at once'? > > "At once" is approximately 2 seconds; that is, the time to say "Sholom alechem > Rebe". Let me discuss the overall question just a bit more fully. > > First of all, under normal circumstances; such as, no question of life and > death or sickness, it is NOT permissible to turn on lights on Shaboss even > with indirect means. This is because that to turn on an electric light on > Shaboss is prohibitted from the Torah itself and not a Rabbinic decree, since > heating a metal to incandescence even without combustion is considered fire. > It is not allowed to perform any activity prohibitted by the Torah on Shabbos > even indirectly. If it is your specific intention to perform a prohibitted > activity, then performing that activity even indirectly and even if only > prohibitted by Rabbinic decree is not allowed. If the result is prohibitted > by Rabbinic decree, will not take place at once, takes place indirectly, > and is not your specific intent; it is permitted to perform the action. > For example, opening a refrigerator would be permitted although some > people are stringent even in this case. By the way, electricity itself is > considered not fire, and operating devices with only motors are generally > not allowed by Rabbinic decree. This whole issue is really much more > complex as in the Talmud there are mentioned five diferent levels of > what is considered indirect action, and each can have somewhat different > application. Also on Yom Tov the situation in some cases is more lenient. > > DISCLAIMER: I am NOT giving any Psak, just giving some backgroud information > to aid understanding the issues. > > Robert Shnidman > robert@brl-vld.arpa When it comes to questions of Shabbat one must be extremely careful. The slightest error can lead to severe consequences. With this note I enter the ongoing discussion as to electricity and Shabbat. One must define some terms before starting. A melacha is a type of act that the Torah forbade because that act was done in the building of the Tabernacle ( mishkan ) in the desert. There are sub-categories to melachot ( plural of melacha ) known as toladot ( offspring- similar to a tree with its subtrees ). There are also Rabbinic decrees regarding Shabbat, which fall into three categories. 1. Melacha d'rabanan - an act which the rabbis declared prohibited because it is similar to an act prohibited by the Torah. 2. Gezera - a act which the rabbis prohibited because it might lead to the doing of a melacha. 3. Uvdin D'chol - an act the rabbis prohibited because it is not in the 'spirit' of Shabbat. The E Torah states in Vayikra ( Leviticus, I don't have the exact location offhand ) Shabbaton, which the Ramban ( Nachmanidies, 13th century scholar ) explains as a positive command from G-D to engage in spiritual matters on Shabbat. The Ramban says if one were to sleep the whole Shabbat without rising from bed he would not have violated the pro- hibition of Lo Taaseh Kol Melacha ( do not do any melacha ) but he also would not have fulfilled the positive commandment to engage in spiritual pursuits. The Rabbis prohibited many things on Shabbat for the reason of Uvdin D'chol, such as doing exercise, playing ball, etc. A few more definitions and I'll get to my point. A melacha must be done in its usual manner ( m'lechet machshevet ). If a right handed person was to write with his left hand on Shabbat he would not be culpable a far as the Torah is concerned. Doing something not in its normal way is called kilachar yad ( as if it was being done with the back of one's hand ). The rabbi's prohibited kil'achar yad. Another way of doing a melacha is unintentionally, meaning, I did the melacha, but not for its intended purpose ( eg. I dig a hole so I can use the dirt but not so I should have a hole ). This is called E'no mitkaven ( without intent ). However, if my action will lead directly and definitely If I do an action which must lead to a prohibited act ( eg. drag a chair across the lawn, which in itself is not prohibited, but it will dig a furrow in the ground, and there is no way to avoid doing this ) then even e'no mitkaven, even if I didn't want the furrow, since it had to come, the action is prohibited, for the reason of P'sik resha ( literally, severing the head. If one was to remove a chicken's head, there is no way the chicken could live, so too an action which must occur [ like the death of the chicken ] is prohibited ) .Y Y The definition of immediately does not depend on 2 seconds or 5 or a pico second. It depends on p'sik resha. Is the prohibited act that gets done a direct outcome of my action, or is it not ? The law of 2 seconds as mentioned in the article I am responding to deals with testimony and in general with matters that relate to monetary matters. Now to tie all this together. I am not a physicist so I do not know if electricity is fire. When the question was first asked it dealt mainly with incandescent lights and tubes where a filament glows. The heating of the metal to glowing is considered fire, but te use of electricity is not. Why then can't I turn on a flour- escent light on Shabbat. To this I give a few answers. 1. The action of completing a circuit could be considered boneh ( con- struction ). One must look into the definition of boneh more carefully to see what it really means. Another possible reason is the problem of nolad ( literally, born, meaning something that came into existence on shabbat. One is not allowed to eat an egg that was laid on shabbat because of nolad [ according to one opinion in the Gemara ]). 3. ( 2 is in the middle of the preceeding paragraph ) Uvdin d'chol- nothing spiritual is gained by turning on a light. You might ask, if so, why should I breathe or eat? Breathing is not a good question because we must live and without it Y breathing we wouldn't last too long ( and the Torah says V'chai behem- we should live by these laws [ the entire Torah], and not die by them, so if it would cause us death we can override the laws. This is the verse from where we learn that one can desecrate the shabbat to save a life ). We are specifically commanded to eat on the shabbat, and we learn this from the pasuk ( verse ) in the Prophets which says Oneg, which is explained as a commandment ot eat three meals on shabbat. Anything else should not be done if it does not add to the spiritual nature of shabbat. Playing board games falls in this category. ( Here I must admit that I am not perfect. I do not spend the entire day learning Torah and Davening. I, too, play trivial pursuit on shabbat, but that does not make it right ). Turning on a light or using any electrical appliance could possibly fall under the category of uvdin d'chol. It was asked before why one cannot press a button on his watch but one can move one's arm, which generates more electricity. To this I answer it is not does not fall unde any of the prohibitions mentioned above. No circuit is completed, nor is anything new created, nor can it be called uvdin d'chol. Pressing the button on my watch, however, falls under these prohibitions. I, to, must add the disclaimer that anything written here is not meant as a definitive answer to any question. Rather, if a question arises, a competent rabbi must be approached and I leave to you to decide whom you consider com- petent. eliyahu teitz 201-353-0388 *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***