Save
Copy
Add to Collection
Export to Google Docs
Share
-Many students have wondered, aren't texting and using a phone very appropriate activities for Shabbat? After all, they involve almost no physical activity - and I can engage in them while enjoying some R&R in my bed!
-To answer this, we'll first explore the nature of melacha on Shabbat generally.
-After all, we'll summarize the specific halakhic issues related to electricity on Shabbat, and include an article that talks about writing on Shabbat and other issues that are relevant for Smartphone use on Shabbat.
(א) וינח ביום השביעי. כאן נתחכם ה' לאסור מלאכות אשר מנו חכמים מ' מלאכות [ח''א] שיש בהם מלאכה שאין בה שום טורח כלל בעשייתה כמו שתאמר המוציא כלי מרשות היחיד לרשות הרבים או להפך וכדומה לזה רבים וחייבה התורה מיתה עליהם, ויאמר אדם מה טורח יש בדבר זה להתחייב לזה אמר הכתוב כי ששת ימים וגו' וינח וגו' פירוש ודוק והשכיל בטעם ותדע כי אין הדבר לצד הטורח לבד והרי מי שנאמר בו (ישעי' מ') לא ייעף ולא ייגע ובו לא יוצדק לומר מנוחה אלא הכוונה היא לצד הפעולה היוצאת אנו דנים הגם שלא תהיה בה יגיעה וטורח, ולזה כל ששם מלאכה עליה הגם כי יעשנה אדם בלא הרגשת דבר הרי זה חייב עליה:
(1) וינח ביום השביעי, He rested on the seventh day, etc. The Torah cleverly forbids among the 39 categories of forbidden work also such activities which do not involve something causing fatigue. Moving an object from a private domain to a public domain or vice versa does not represent any "work" in the regular sense of the word. There are other such activities (writing two letters of the alphabet for instance) all of which are nonetheless prohibited on pain of death. A person may say to himself that since such acitivities do not involve physical effort, why should there be a death penalty for performing such activities on the Sabbath? The Torah answers that the work prohibition is not related to the amount of effort involved. If Hashem rested on the seventh day it was certainly not because He had become tired of creating the universe and needed a rest. Isaiah 40,28 puts it succinctly: "He never grows faint or weary." The word מנוחה in the sense of rest as we use it, i.e. rest in order to recover from exhaustion, is quite inappropriate when applied to Hashem. Any activity to which the term מלאכה is applicable is prohibited regardless of the physical or mental effort involved.
The word “melachah” appears two hundred times in Scripture and never once refers to physical labor. The melachah which is forbidden on Shabbat is conceived as the execution of an intelligent purpose by the practical skill of man: i.e. any production, creation, or transforming an object for human purposes; but not physical exertion.
הרב שלמה וולבי
הג"ר שמשון רפאל הירש כתב כי שורש איסור מלאכות בשבת הוא לבטל מעשה האדם כלפי השי"ת, כלומר: בשבת מופקעת בעלות האדם על הבריאה, והקב"ה שברא את העולם הוא ה"בעלים" היחידי עליו ביום זה עד שאין לאדם רשות לכל מלאכה יוצרת, כלחיצה על כפתור להדליק אור...
Rav Shlomo Wolbe
Rabbi Samson Rafael Hirsch writes [in his work The Nineteen Letters] that the root of the prohibition against melachah on Shabbat is that man’s control over the universe is relinquished on Shabbat. Only God, Who created the universe, is in charge on this day, to the extent that man has no permission to do anything at all that is creative or transformative, even a simple act like pressing a switch to turn on a light.
This definition of "melacha" helps us to understand what exactly we derive from the Mishkan about working on Shabbat:
The Tabernacle was in effect a recreation of the universe. God created the world in a pure and pristine state, but human beings defiled and distorted it. The Tabernacle (and later the Temple in Jerusalem) was intended to serve as one corner of the world in which the original pristine state of reality could be preserved. Thus, the construction of the Tabernacle by the Jewish people paralleled God’s act of Creation. Any type of activity that was involved in its construction is therefore considered the type of creative activity that the Torah requires us to desist from on Shabbat.
A Review of 5 Halakhic Approaches to the
Prohibition of Electricity on Shabbat
A. Kindling a Fire
(works for incandescents but not LED's)
And Rav Sheshet said in this regard: What difference is there to me between cooking a wick, which is performed for court-imposed capital punishments, and what difference is there to me between the cooking of herbs used to dye curtains for the Tabernacle, from whose work the list of prohibited labors on Shabbat is derived?
(א) הַמַּבְעִיר כָּל שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב...
וְכֵן הַמַּדְלִיק אֶת הַנֵּר אוֹ אֶת הָעֵצִים בֵּין לְהִתְחַמֵּם בֵּין לְהָאִיר הֲרֵי זֶה חַיָּב.
הַמְחַמֵּם אֶת הַבַּרְזֶל כְּדֵי לְצָרְפוֹ בְּמַיִם הֲרֵי זֶה תּוֹלֶדֶת מַבְעִיר וְחַיָּב:
A person who kindles even the smallest fire is liable...
Similarly, a person who lights a candle or wood, whether to generate warmth or light, is liable.
A person who heats iron in order to strengthen it by submerging it in water is liable for [performing] a derivative [of the forbidden labor] of kindling.
B. Chazon Ish - Building and Breaking Apart a Circuit
With the opening of electricity, in which we bring in the electrical stream into the sockets, it is considered as if he put together an object... if, by fixing the shape in order to materialize, and usage results from this, it is certainly considered building.... And since the lighting is building, turning off the light is considered destroying.
Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach and Rav Ovadia Yosef challenged the Chazon Ish's thesis:
C. Rav Yitzchak Shmelkes -
Rabbinic Prohibition of Molid
רבה ורב יוסף דאמרי תרוייהו סחופי כסא אשיראי ביומא טבא אסור מ"ט משום דקמוליד ריחא
Rabba and Rav Yosef both said the following: It is prohibited to overturn a cup containing perfume onto silk garments on a Festival. What is the reason for this prohibition? It is because it produces a new scent in the garment.
Since in the [previous] text I discussed electric candles, I will also mention something about whether one is permitted to speak on Shabbat through the machine called the "telephone." In my humble view, there is a prohibition in this matter, and one who is careful will distance himself from this. For aside from the fact that one who speaks into such an instrument will necessarily to touch a bell when he wishes to speak, which is prohibited due to creating a sound, one should also prohibit this action, because by closing the electrical current, another electrical current is created. This is prohibited on Shabbat, just as one who overturns a cup of perfume onto silk...
D. Rav Asher Weiss -
Creating a New Entity falls under Makeh ba-Pattish
(the final blow of the hammer)
I myself hold that when one closes a circuit, whether for the purpose of light or other purposes, a biblical prohibition of striking the final blow of the hammer...
And it appears in my humble view that, in regard to completing an electric circuit in all its facets, that there is undoubtedly a highly significant, incomparable innovation... even for LED lights.
Therefore, in the final analysis, one must relate to LED lights as work from the Torah in all respects, and heaven forbid one being lenient in this matter in any way.
E. שבתון - Based on Ramban, the use of electricity will inevitably undermine the kind of atmosphere that Shabbat is meant to cultivate
ונראה שהמדרש הזה לומר שנצטוינו מן התורה להיות לנו מנוחה בי"ט אפילו מדברים שאינן מלאכה לא שיטרח כל היום למדוד התבואות ולשקול הפירות והמתכות ולמלא החביות יין ולפנות הכלים וגם האבנים מבית לבית וממקום למקום ואם היתה עיר מוקפת חומה ודלתות נעולות בלילה יהיו עומסים על החמורים ואף יין וענבים ותאנים וכל משא יביאו בי"ט ויהיה השוק מלא לכל מקח וממכר ותהיה החנות פתוחה והחנוני מקיף והשלחנים על שלחנם והזהובים לפניהם ויהיו הפועלים משכימין למלאכתן ומשכירין עצמם כחול לדברים אלו וכיוצא בהן והותרו הימים הטובים האלו ואפילו השבת עצמה שבכל זה אין בהם משום מלאכה לכך אמרה תורה "שבתון" שיהיה יום שביתה ומנוחה לא יום טורח וזהו פירוש טוב ויפה.
הרב יעקב אריאל
רציתי להעיר הערה עקרונית בדבר הדיון בחשמל ,הדן בנושא בקלות ראש, כאילו גדולי הפוסקים לא התייחסו אליו בחומרה...
אם נזלזל באיסור השימוש בחשמל, השבת כולה עלולה להתחלל.
ראוי לזכור גם את דברי הרמב״ן (ויקרא כג כד), על המסחר בשבת, שאין בו שום מלאכה ממש, אולם הוא אסור מהתורה אין לך חילול שבת גדול ממנו. ניקח לדוגמה רק את התקשורת – הטלפון והרדיו והטלוויזיה והאינטרנט וכו' – אם כל אלו היו מותרים חלילה בשבת, אנה היינו מגיעים! ברוך שחנן את חכמי ישראל בחכמה, בינה ודעת לאסור אותם...
Rav Yaakov Ariel
I wish to make a fundamental observation regarding the discussion of electricity, namely that one who discusses it lightly, [acts] as if the greats of the poskim did not relate to it with stringency...
If we degrade the prohibition of electricity usage on Shabbat, the entirety of Shabbat might come to be undermined.
It is also fitting mention that words of Nachmanides (Vayikra 23:24) regarding business of Shabbat, which involves no technical work, yet is prohibited from the Torah; there is no greater violation of Shabbat than this. Take, for example, communications - the telephone, radio, television, internet, etc. - if all these we heaven forbid permitted on Shabbat, where we we reach? Blessed be the One Who granted wisdom to the Jewish scholars to prohibit them...
Fascinatingly, there is a huge movement toward unplugging one day a week. In other words, the idea of Shabbat as a day of rest from technology is beginning to catch on worldwide. Among others, Senator Joe Lieberman, an observant Jew, wrote a book about the beauty of Shabbat that has been a best-seller.
Below is a summary by R. Gil Student of some of the additional issues involved in cellphone usage on Shabbat.
What’s Wrong With Texting on Shabbat? A Halachic Analysis
GIL STUDENT
Texting on Shabbat involves the violation of a number of rabbinic prohibitions and perhaps some Biblical prohibitions as well. We will explore a few key technical issues, keeping in mind that there are others which we cannot discuss due to space limitations.
Electricity
The treatment of electricity in halachah is complex. The accepted practice is to forbid adjusting electric currents on Shabbat, although there is a range of opinions as to why. Early discussions in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries explored various approaches to defining electricity within the categories of halachah.
The Gemara (Beitzah 23a) forbids, on a rabbinic level, spraying perfume on a garment on Shabbat because it creates (molid) a fragrance within the garment. Rabbi Yitzchak Shmelkes, in his responsa Beit Yitzchak (I:120:4) published in 1878, proposed that closing an electrical circuit, thereby causing electricity to flow through the wires, is similar to perfume entering fabric and also would fall under the rabbinic prohibition of molid.
Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, in his 1935 work Me’orei Eish, disagreed with Rabbi Shmelkes based on an intimate understanding of the new technology and complex Talmudic arguments. A decade later, in 1946, Rabbi Avraham Karelitz published his Chazon Ish on Orach Chaim (no. 50) in which he forbade completing an electrical circuit because it constitutes the forbidden labor of building (boneh).
The consensus today seems to follow Rabbi Yosef Eliyahu Henkin’s middle approach found in his 1945 work Eidut LeYisrael (nos. 20,56): unless there are extenuating circumstances, we follow the strict views which completely forbid the closing of an electric circuit. When there are extenuating circumstances, we take into account the lenient views. Therefore, unless we are discussing a doctor or soldier using a cell phone or e-reader on Shabbat for his vital work, or some similar mitigating circumstance, we cannot permit the electronic use entailed.
Writing
Generating letters on a cell phone screen in almost all cases violates at least a rabbinic prohibition. The Biblical prohibition against writing on Shabbat only applies to permanent ink on parchment or ink and/or parchment equivalents. If one writes with fruit juice, which isn’t permanent, he violates a rabbinic prohibition. Similarly, writing in sand is only rabbinically prohibited.
Rabbi Shmuel Wosner (Shevet HaLevi 6:37), writing in 1983, ruled that creating letters on a computer screen is Biblically prohibited. The screen will not dissolve or rot and is therefore the equivalent of parchment. The letters also will remain on the screen permanently, unless someone actively erases them. However, Rabbi Nachum Rabinovich (Melumdei Milchamah [1993], nos. 57, 63) argues that writing on a computer screen is not a prohibited form of writing because neither the letters nor the background is permanent. One will eventually turn off the electricity, causing everything to disappear, and even if one does not, the batteries or generator will eventually lose power and turn the computer off. Similarly, Dr. Avraham Sofer (Nishmat Avraham [2007, second edition], vol. 1, p. 569ff.) records that Rabbi Auerbach told him that writing via an electron stream is not considered writing with regard to the Biblical prohibition.
However, Rabbi Zalman Menachem Koren (Meorei Eish HaShalem [2010], pp. 943-946) notes that a recently developed type of LCD, which includes the Kindle’s Eink technology, is problematic even according to these lenient views. With this technology, the molecules remain in place—the screen retains that which is written on it—even after being turned off. Writing on this type of screen would be Biblically prohibited because both the “ink” and the “parchment” last.
Lighting
Cell phone screens present an additional issue. As previously mentioned, spraying perfume on a garment is forbidden on Shabbat because it creates (molid) a fragrance within the garment. While Rabbi Auerbach disagreed with the view that causing an electric current to flow is considered molid, he did not entirely reject the Talmudic concept. He argued that unrecognizable changes cannot be considered molid, but lighting a dark object, such as with a neon light, is rabbinically prohibited.
Applying this to cell phone screens, both CRT and plasma screens involve lighting pixels one way or another. Rabbi Auerbach would therefore consider their use on Shabbat rabbinically forbidden because of molid. LCD screens are backlit. If the backlight is already on, then using such a screen only blocks or modifies light and does not turn it on. Therefore, molid does not apply to LCD screens unless one turns on the backlight. However, cell phones never maintain a constant backlight because of the battery drain. Therefore, using even LCD screens is rabbinically forbidden, according to Rabbi Auerbach, because of molid.
Conclusion
There are other issues worthy of mention, such as texting indirectly (grama), texts being automatically saved to a server which might be prohibited and the parameters of the somewhat ambiguous prohibition of performing a “weekday activity” on Shabbat (uvda dechol), which we cannot explore here. However, an important responsum by Rabbi Rabinovich (ibid.) places a worthy emphasis on the entirety of halachic arguments on this subject.
Rabbi Rabinovich was asked by his students in the IDF whether when writing non-urgent security-related information on Shabbat they should type on computers or write with special Shabbat pens with slowly disappearing ink. After extensive consultation with IDF engineers, Rabbi Rabinovich ruled that the otherwise rabbinically prohibited pens are halachically preferable to electronic writing on a computer screen. Absent life-threatening danger, even intelligence operatives in the army must avoid texting on Shabbat.
Rabbi Gil Student writes frequently on Jewish issues and blogs at TorahMusings.com. This article is an abbreviated version of a longer study Rabbi Student will shortly publish on this topic.
This article was featured in Jewish Action Spring 2012.
