Electricity / Electronics / Electric Cars (9) – Some Specific Examples of Shevut (Part 1): Uvdin D’Chol

While there are many different Shabbat prohibitions that have been added by the Rabbis because of Shvut, we want to go into further detail about a few of the categories of Shvut that are particularly relevant to our question. This week we will look at the concept of Uvdin D’chol – Weekday activities.

The term Uvdin D’chol – or, ‘weekday activities’ – comes up frequently in responsa about Shabbat. It is considered an Issur Shvut, although it is not well defined and is used in a number of different ways.

One can find the source for Uvdin d’chol in the Talmud. The Mishnah in tractate Shabbat states:

MISHNA: Rabbi Eliezer says: One may suspend the strainer on a Festival … And the Rabbis say: One may not suspend the strainer on a Festival, and one may not place wine for filtering through a suspended strainer on Shabbat … [Mishnah Shabbat 20:1]

In explaining the prohibition of use the strainer on Shabbat, Abaye says:

It is a rabbinic decree issued so that one will not conduct himself on Shabbat in the manner that he conducts himself during the week. [BT, Shabbat 138a]

This thinking, that we have to distance ourselves from the things we do during the week, can be found in Naḥmanides understanding of Shevut quoted above. He writes that ‘We should not be disturbed all day to measure our grain … and the shops would be open and money changers tables strewn with coins … like the rest of the week.’

Maimonides is more nuanced in his understanding of what constitutes a ‘weekday activity’. After listing various activities that are forbidden because of Shevut, he adds

Some acts are forbidden on the Sabbath even though they neither resemble nor lead to prohibited work. Why then were they forbidden? Because it is written: “If you refrain from following your business on the Sabbath, on my holy day… If you honour it, not following your wonton ways, not pursuing your business, nor speaking of it” (Isaiah 58:13). Hence, one is forbidden to go anywhere on the Sabbath in connection with his business, or even to talk about it. Thus, one must not discuss with his partner what to sell on the next day, or what to buy, or how to build a certain house, or what merchandise to take to such-and-such a place. All this, and the like, is forbidden, for it is written “nor speaking of it.” That is to say, speaking of business on the Sabbath is forbidden; thinking of it, however, is permitted. [Mishnah Torah 24:1]

He goes on to list many activities that are forbidden just because they ‘aren’t in the spirit of Shabbat’.

In a subsequent response, Maimonides further clarifies the matter.

And we are not saying in this that he should not do [any kind of activity] that he does during the week, meaning he should not eat since he also eats in the week, nor should he dine in the way he dines in the week. It is a clear that you never find things that the sages have forbidden just because he does them during the week. Rather, it refers to things that lead to doing a craft …  [Teshuvot HaRambam 306]

The dividing line between ‘an ordinary activity that we happen to do on Shabbat’ and ‘a weekday activity which is not in the spirit of Shabbat’ is ambiguous. This has led to many different opinions amongst the Poskim (Halakhic decisors) in defining this prohibition.

Uvdin D’Hol is a classic example of a subjective prohibition – what we have called a weak Shvut. That’s not to say that it isn’t an important consideration – but one where we would be more lenient if there were other extenuating circumstances

Based on: A New Responsum on the Sabbath. Rabbi Mordecai Schwartz and Rabbi Chaim Weiner.

Electricity / Electronics / Electric Cars (8) – A Review

POST 7

After seven posts it is time to summarise what has been said and to draw some conclusions.

These are the main points that have been made thus far.

• The idea that the 7^th day is a day of rest is a central tenet of the Jewish religion. There is no valid interpretation of Judaism that doesn’t have Shabbat at its heart.

• Our lives are very different from those of the Rabbis of the Talmud. A modern interpretation of Shabbat needs to hold on to the principles of the past and reapply them to modern reality. The idea that the 7^th day is a day of rest is a core value, as important – or perhaps even more important – than in the past.

• The Torah sets out two different obligations for Shabbat: A prohibition against doing work (a negative commandment) and an obligation to rest (a positive commandment). The prohibition against doing work is called Issur Melakhah. The commandment to rest is called Shvut.

• Our definition of Melakhah is Any work that results in physical change and reaches its enduring form on Shabbat.  

• Using electricity isn’t Melakhah because it doesn’t automatically make something that is enduring, although specific uses of electricity – like cooking or cutting or writing – might be a Melakhah. Creating energy by itself isn’t a Melakhah – otherwise, lifting something up and putting it on a high shelf (increasing its Kinetic energy) would be prohibited. Fire is prohibited because combustion creates ashes, charcoal and smoke. Using electricity doesn’t do that.

• The obligation to rest on Shabbat is called Shvut. It is a positive commandment – but the exact nature of how you rest isn’t spelt out in the Torah. The Rabbis have introduced a series of prohibitions to define the meaning of rest on Shabbat. The commandment that is most like Shvut is the obligation to fast on Yom Kippur. The Torah commands us to ‘afflict out souls’ on Yom Kippur (a positive commandment) but doesn’t provide details about how to do this. The Rabbis have introduced a series of prohibitions to define how we should afflict our souls – such as refraining from eating and drinking. The obligation to rest on Shabbat has the same status as the obligation to fast on Yom Kippur.

• Under the category of Shvut, the Rabbis prohibited acts that are broadly similar to Melakhah but technically not counted as work. For example, they prohibited buying things with money because it is similar to other business transactions that involve writing contracts. Using electricity is like this. Electricity is the primary source of energy that powers our world. It is like fire because in the time of the Talmud fire was the primary source of energy for light and heat. This kind of Shvut – the prohibition of something that is similar to a Melakhah – is what we call a Strong Shvut. It has the status of almost a Torah prohibition.

• Sometimes the Rabbis prohibited things on Shabbat as a ‘fence around the Torah’ and to preserve the nature of Shabbat as a day of rest. These prohibitions are also called Shvut – even though they were created by the Rabbis and aren’t necessarily similar to a Melakhah. We call these prohibitions Weak Shvut because these prohibitions were introduced by the Rabbis and the rules around them are more lenient.  There are many examples of these prohibitions – and we will look at some of them in the coming weeks.

We could almost conclude our investigation at this point. If using electricity on Shabbat is forbidden – then driving an electric car is also forbidden. Ultimately – that is our conclusion, but it is more complicated than that.

As we have seen, there is a difference between a Shvut prohibition and an Issur Melakhah. As a Rabbinic prohibition – we are more lenient in our application of Shvut – and there are circumstances where these prohibitions can be circumvented. Before we reach our final conclusion, we need to have a better understanding of Shvut – when and how it applies.

In our next posts it this series we will take a closer look at the prohibition of Shvut, the types of prohibitions and the circumstances when these prohibitions can be overridden by other concerns.

Rabbi Chaim Weiner

Electricity / Electronics / Electric Cars (7) – Shvut

What is shvut?

When the Torah introduces the Mitzvah of Shabbat we are told: the seventh day is a sabbath of the Lord, God. you shall not do any work …: [Ex. 20:10]. We can discern two separate commandments here: A commandment to rest [the seventh day is a sabbath] and a commandment to abstain from doing any work [you shall not do any work]. This a duality that can be found throughout the Torah.

The simplest explanation of the term Shvut is that this is the positive commandment of the Torah to rest on the seventh day (and festivals). This is different from the prohibition of doing any work, which is a negative commandment. Shvut is a peculiar commandment. Although it is a positive commandment, you can only do it by abstaining from work – which is like a negative commandment. There is one other commandment like this in the Torah. On Yom Kippur we are commanded to “Afflict your soul” [Lev. 23:27] This is a positive commandment. The way we afflict our souls is to not eat or drink etc. – a list of negative activities proscribed by the Rabbis.

Isn’t ‘not doing work’ the same as ‘resting’? Not necessarily. The best explanation of the difference can be found in the commentary of Nahmanides [Northern Spain, 13th century] to the Torah. He writes:

…It appears to me that the meaning of the Midrash [interpreting the phrase “Shabbaton”] is that we are commanded on Yom Tov [and Shabbat] to rest from those activities that technically do not qualify as melak’ah. We should not be disturbed all day to measure our grain, to weigh our fruit and possessions, to fill our vessels with wine, to move our wares, and even building stones, from house to house and place to place, and if located in a walled city, load up our donkeys, and even wine, grapes, figs and all packages could indeed be delivered on a festival; and the marketplace would be filled with ongoing commerce, and the shops would be open and money changers tables strewn with coins, and the workers would arise for their duties and establish their daily wages, like the rest of the week, and so on. These and similar activities, whether on Yom Tov or even Shabbat itself, all these activities do not technically constitute melakhah. Therefore, the Torah commands us “Shabbaton” — that these should be days of rest and cessation of work, and not days of labour and toil. And this is a good and beautiful interpretation. (Commentary on the Torah, Lev. 23:24)

The essence of Shvut is to make sure that Shabbat remains a day of rest. The Shvut prohibitions have been introduced by the Rabbis to prevent one from technically sidestepping the prohibitions of Melakhah and therefore technically conform to the laws of Shabbat while still being engaged in our creative and economic endeavours.

Although the commandment to rest is from the Torah, the specific Shvut prohibitions were introduced by the Rabbis. Some are mentioned in the Mishnah. For example:

And which acts [is one liable] because of shvut? One may not climb a tree, and one may not ride on an animal. And one may not swim in water. And one may not clap hands, nor slap [thighs], nor dance. [Mishnah Beitzah 5:2]

Maimonides summarises the category of Shevut in this manner.

The Torah states (Exodus 23:12), “You shall rest.” You must cease even behaviours that are not melakhah. And the things that the Sages forbade for the sake of rest (shvut) are numerous. Some of them are prohibited because they are akin to melakhah, and some of them are prohibited as a circumscription to prevent encroachment on prohibitions punishable by stoning (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Shabbat 21:1).

Note that Maimonides discerns two different types of Shevut prohibitions. Some things are forbidden because they are similar or close to an actual Melakhah. In our opinion, electricity falls into this category. It is like fire in that it is the main source of energy that powers our society. But it is not fire. It is forbidden as a Shvut because of its similarity to fire.

Maimonides also mentions that things were prohibited by the Rabbis as a safeguard against accidentally transgressing. In fact, there are many different kinds of Shvut. Some are treated as if they were almost Torah prohibitions like the prohibition against shopping or conducting business. Some are seen as ‘only’ being Rabbinic safeguards, such as many things that were prohibited because they didn’t seem to be in the spirit of Shabbat. This is a subcategory of Shevut called Uvdin d’Hol [weekday activities]. This is a subjective category. Whenever we come across a Shvut prohibition we need to be aware of which type of Shvut we are talking about.

Does it make a difference if a prohibition is an Issur Melakhah or an Issur Shvut? Aren’t they both forbidden by the Torah?

While it’s true that these are both derived from the Torah, there is a big difference between the two. The prohibition against doing work is a negative commandment while the obligation to rest is a positive commandment. Negative commandments are stricter than position commandments. Furthermore, while the obligation to rest is rooted in the Torah, the exact definition of Shvut is Rabbinic. In general, Rabbinic prohibitions are more lenient than Torah prohibitions.

There are circumstances where a rabbinic prohibition would be overridden by other halakhic considerations. Hence, as a Shvut prohibition, there are circumstances where we would be lenient in ruling on the use of electricity when other considerations may take precedence. Such exceptions may include the use of hearing aids, mobility scooters and elevators to provide access for those with special needs. Determining when special circumstances override a Shvut prohibition is particularly complicated. Amongst other things, It also depends on what kind of Shvut we are addressing, and whether it is being treated as a kind of Melakhah or whether it is only a Rabbinic safeguard.

Based on: A New Responsum on the Sabbath. Rabbi Mordecai Schwartz and Rabbi Chaim Weiner.

Electricity / Electronics / Electric Cars (6) – Electricity on Shabbat (Part 2)

In our last post, we looked at the idea that electricity is forbidden on Shabbat because it is like fire. This week we will look at some other explanations that have been given for this prohibition.

BUILDING: Boneh:

R. Abraham Karelitz, known as the Hazon Ish [20^th century, Israel] argues that turning an electrical circuit on and off is forbidden under the categories of Boneh (building) and Soter (destroying). The logic is that by closing a circuit you are ‘building’ it (a circuit is only a circuit when it is complete) and when you break the circuit to turn an appliance off – you are destroying it.

This argument has been refuted. An electric appliance is made to be turned on and off. When you flick the switch, you are not building the circuit – you are just changing the position of the switch. If adjusting something so that it would be useful counts as ‘building’ – then turning on a water tap would count as ‘building a pipe’ and opening a door would be ‘breaking the wall’. This is obviously not the case as these activities have always been permitted. So this is certainly not a reason to proscribe the use of electricity.

FINISHING and OBJECT: Makeh B’fatish. (Striking a hammer blow).

Any action that completes a labour is included in this prohibition. The argument is like the above position regarding building – that by switching an appliance on you are completing it; bringing it to it’s working state. A kettle is only a kettle when it can be used to boil water.

The refutation is also similar – electrical appliances are made to be turned on and off. They are completed when they come of the production line – not every time they are used.

MAKING SOMETHING NEW: Molid: (making something new).

The Talmud [Beitza 23a] forbids spilling perfume on a garment on Shabbat to infuse it with a sweet smell as this would ‘permanently change the garment’. Thus, even a small change can turn something into something new. R. Yitzchak Schmelkis [19^th century, Ukraine] argues that when electricity flows through an appliance it ‘changes’ it – giving ‘birth’ to a new thing. This argument was rejected by later authorities because electric appliances are designed to be regularly turned on and off. They are not permanently changed by the electricity flowing through them and they do not become a new thing.

Over the years other arguments have been put forward to suggest that the use of electricity is Melakhah – a forbidden category of work on Shabbat, such as Mitakein Mana, Preparing a Utensil or even Bishul – cooking. None of these arguments is convincing and the simple conclusion is that using electricity isn’t an Issur Melakhah – an activity prohibited on Shabbat because it is a form of work.

That doesn’t mean that the use of electricity is permitted on Shabbat. The reason that Rabbis tried to find a way to prohibit the use of electricity on Shabbat was because they intuitively felt that electricity has, in our society, assumed the role fire played in the past. Throughout much of history, fire was the main form of energy that powered life; providing light, heat, powering the economy. In our world, electricity has taken over those functions. This brings us back to the challenge we posed in the first of this series of posts. In order to preserve Shabbat in modern society it is necessary to develop a new way of viewing Shabbat prohibitions that addresses the use of electricity.

Such a category already exists in the laws of Shabbat. There is a separate prohibition that is used for those things that are similar to the forbidden acts on Shabbat – even if they are exactly the same as them. This prohibition is called Shvut – and we will dedicate a future post to explain what Shvut is and why it is relevant to our question. 

Based on: A New Responsum on the Sabbath. Rabbi Mordecai Schwartz and Rabbi Chaim Weiner and  The Use of Electrical and Electronic Devices on Shabbat. Rabbi Daniel Nevins. CJLS 2012

Electricity / Electronics / Electric Cars (5) – Electricity on Shabbat (Part 1)

This brings us to one of the central issues – are you allowed to use electricity on Shabbat? While most Shabbat observant Jews assume that the answer is categorically no, it isn’t as straightforward as that. Electricity is a new technology that wasn’t known at the time of the Mishnah and Talmud. It doesn’t clearly fit any of the forbidden categories of labour that were listed in Mishnah. The mainstream position on the use of electricity on Shabbat is something that emerged over time.

Using Electricity also doesn’t meet the definition of Melakhah that we proposed above – making a lasting change to the environment. Using electricity in and of itself doesn’t make a lasting change – although electricity can be used to do so. So – what is the status of electricity in the Laws of Shabbat?

There have been many attempts to root the prohibition of using electricity in the 39 Avot Melakhah – the master categories of Shabbat prohibitions mentioned above. There isn’t room here to go through them all, so I’ll focus on the most common ones. For a fuller treatment of this subject, I highly recommend reading The Use of Electrical and Electronic Devices on Shabbat by Rabbi Daniel Nevins. [CJLS 2012]

The main categories that have been suggested as the source of the prohibition of using electricity are: Fire, Building, Finishing and Object and Creating Something new. This week we will look at the most common explanation given for the prohibition of using electricity – that it is similar to fire.

FIRE: Mavir and Mechabeh (lighting a fire and extinguishing a fire).

As electric appliances are used for many of the functions that were previously done by fire, this is the most obvious category to investigate as the source of the prohibition of using electricity. Electric power can be used to create both heat and light – which in the past would have come from burning a fire. But electricity doesn’t seem meet the halachic definition of fire. There is no combustion or flame and it doesn’t produce charcoal – which are the main characteristics of ‘real’ fire.

The Talmud discusses a source of heat that doesn’t involve combustion (which it calls a גחלת של מתכה – a metal ember). Heating metal to the extent that it gives off light and heat is basically the way that traditional light bulbs worked – and therefore this discussion is relevant to modern life.

Rambam summarises the discussion as follows:

A person who heats metal in order to anneal it in water—this is a derivative form of burning and is forbidden. [MT Shabbat 9:6] The Shulchan Aruch rules (when talking about removing fire hazards on Shabbat): If a coal is situated in a place where many can be damaged, it is permissible to extinguish it, whether it is made of metal or wood, but the Rambam forbids this if it is wood. The Magen Avraham then clarifies that ‘regarding metal there is no [prohibition of extinguishing] for it is not burning.’ [OH 335:35].

The conclusion at the end of that discussion is that even heating a filament to a very high temperature isn’t considered fire according to the Torah [DeOraita]. It is, however, forbidden by the Rabbis for other reasons.

In spite of this, intuitively, electricity feels similar to fire as both are important sources of energy that power our economy and our society. While that doesn’t make it into a Melakhah – it does have halachic significance. We will return to this point later in this series.

We will look at some of the other explanations that have been given for prohibiting the use of electricity on Shabbat in our next post.

Based on: A New Responsum on the Sabbath. Rabbi Mordecai Schwartz and Rabbi Chaim Weiner and  The Use of Electrical and Electronic Devices on Shabbat. Rabbi Daniel Nevins. CJLS 2012

Electricity / Electronics / Electric Cars (4) – What is Melakhah [Work]? (Part 2)

In our previous post, we started to look at various narratives to explain the logic behind the list of Melakhot. Last week, we looked at two narratives that connected the concept of Melakhah with the Mishkan, or the Tabernacle in the desert. We saw that neither of them we really used by the Rabbis in their discussions of the laws of Shabbat. This week we will look at two further narratives that play a greater role in rabbinic literature.

Narrative Three: Basic Human Needs

A close examination of the list of 39 forbidden labours that are found in Mishnah Shabbat suggests that the forbidden labours are arranged in four ‘courses’ of basic human labours that are the backbone of society: Food, Clothing, Writing documents and Shelter. Each of these activities is broken down into their constituent parts. Interestingly, the source of these lists isn’t in the realm of Shabbat. These are found elsewhere in Rabbinic literature as descriptions of everyday life. Note the following source from the Babylonian Talmud:

Ben Zoma, when he saw the crowds on the Temple Mount said, “Blessed is the one who created these to serve me. How hard did Adam toil before he could taste a morsel: he sowed, ploughed, reaped, sheaved, threshed, winnowed, bound sheaves, ground, sifted, kneaded, and baked, and only then could he eat. But I arise in the morning and find all these before me. How hard did Adam toil before he could wear a cloak? He sheared wool, whitened it, combed it, dyed it, spun, and wove, and afterwards wore it. But I arise in the morning and find all these before me.

BT Berakhot 6:2

These are descriptions of the basic activities necessary to sustain society. If this is the definition of Melakhah, then the meaning of Melakhah is to cease on the seventh day from those labours that are used to advance, develop and create our society, instead, spending a day enjoying the fruits of our labours and dedicating ourselves to our social and spiritual lives. This explanation fits neatly into the model of Shabbat as described in Abraham Heschel’s ‘The Sabbath’ quoted previously.

This is a beautiful explanation, which plays a big role in modern discourse about Shabbat. But, unfortunately, it too wasn’t used in the Talmud in its discussions of Shabbat law.

This brings us to our fourth and final narrative.

Narrative Four: Physical Changes in Form or Substance on Shabbat

Consider the following Mishnah:

One who builds: how much must he build to be liable? He who builds any amount, and he who chisels, and he who strikes with a hammer (makeh be-fatish) or with an axe, and he who bores [a hole] of any size, is liable. This is the general principle: whoever does work and their work endures on Shabbat, they are liable. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: even one who strikes with a hammer on the anvil at the completion of his work is liable, because he is as one who improves his work.

M. Shabbat 12:1

While this Mishnah deals specifically with determining the amount of work one needs to do to quality as a transgression, the definition of Melakhah found in it is much broader as it relates to several different Melakhot. As Rashi explains in his commentary on this Mishnah, “this refers to the individual who does work.” That is to say, any work which results in physical change and reaches its enduring form on Shabbat is considered a melakhah”.

This source appears in a Halakhic context and gives a broad definition of Melakhah. This is the definition of Melakhah which we adopt in our responsa and will use for understanding the status of electricity and the use of electric cars on Shabbat.

We will look at the status of electricity on Shabbat in our next post.

Based on: A New Responsum on the Sabbath. Rabbi Mordecai Schwartz and Rabbi Chaim Weiner.

Electricity / Electronics / Electric Cars (3) – What is Melakhah [Work]? (Part 1)

We have now reached the key question. The central commandment of Shabbat is the prohibition against doing any work: לא תעשה כל מלאכה – you shall not do any work. [Ex. 20:10]. But what counts as work?

The Mishnah gives a list of the different categories of work in the 7th chapter of tractate Shabbat:

The 39 categories of melakhah are:
ploughing, sowing, reaping, binding sheaves, threshing, winnowing, selecting, grinding, sifting, kneading, baking,

shearing wool, washing wool, beating wool, dyeing wool, spinning, weaving, making two loops, weaving two threads, separating two threads, tying, untying, sewing stitches, tearing,

trapping, slaughtering, flaying, tanning, scraping hide, marking hides, cutting hide to shape, writing two or more letters, erasing two or more letters,

building, demolishing, extinguishing a fire, kindling a fire, putting the finishing touch on an object
and transporting an object between the private domain and the public domain.

Mishnah Shabbat 7:2

The Mishnah doesn’t provide any explanation of the logic behind this list, but in the Rabbinic literature, we find at least 4 different narratives that attempt to explain the meaning of work on Shabbat. We will examine them below.

Narrative One: The Construction of the Mishkan

The best-known explanation of the Melakhot is that which is found Mekhilta of Rabbi Yishmael, and subsequently in the Babylonian Talmud, particularly amongst the Amoraim of the later generations. This explanation sees a link between the construction of the Mishkan and the prohibitions of Shabbat.

… It is, [therefore] written “Moses then convoked the whole Israelite community and said to them: These are the things that the Lord has commanded you to do: On six days work may be done, but on the seventh day you shall have a sabbath of complete rest, holy to the Lord…” (Exod. 35:1-2) before charging the people with the work of the sanctuary — to teach that such work is to be done on a weekday, and not on the Shabbat.

Subsequent debates in the Talmud are ambiguous about the role of this narrative. However, it is frequently quoted in later literature, for example in the Aruch HaShulchan:

All labours that were performed in the construction of the Mishkan- those are the labours that are forbidden on Shabbat.

[Michael Yechiel Halevy-Epstein, Aruch Ha-Shulchan, OH 242:9 ]

This explanation is not found in the Mishnah. The Talmud never uses it to explain why something has been forbidden – for instance, by saying that a specific activity is forbidden because that is what they used to do in the Temple. The Mishnah provides three other definitions of forbidden work on Shabbat. For these reasons, we don’t consider this explanation as being the prime narrative to explain the Shabbat prohibitions.

Narrative Two: Carrying and Reassembling the Mishkan

There are several places where the Mishnah connects between the work done in carrying and assembling the Mishkan and the laws of Shabbat. For example:

הַמּוֹצִיא בֵּין בִּימִינוֹ בֵּין בִּשְׂמֹאלוֹ, בְּתוֹךְ חֵיקוֹ אוֹ עַל כְּתֵפוֹ, חַיָּב, שֶׁכֵּן מַשָּׂא בְנֵי קְהָת.

If one carries something out, whether with his right or with his left hand, in his lap or on his shoulder, he is liable, because this is the way of the carrying of the children of Kohat.
M.Shabbat 10:3

Or

הַכּוֹתֵב שְׁתֵּי אוֹתִיּוֹת…  חַיָּב. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, לֹא חִיְּבוּ שְׁתֵּי אוֹתִיּוֹת אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם רֹשֶׁם, שֶׁכָּךְ הָיוּ כוֹתְבִין עַל קַרְשֵׁי הַמִּשְׁכָּן, לֵידַע אֵיזוֹ בֶן זוּגוֹ.

He who writes two letters… is liable. Rabbi Jose said: they made one liable for writing two letters only because [he makes] a mark, since this is how they would write on each board of the tabernacle, to know which its companion was.

M. Shabbat 12:3

None of these sources connect the prohibition to the work of constructing the Mishkan – only the work connected to carrying and reassembling it. Also, these sources are all concerned with establishing the degree of liability in the case of transgression – but not in the actual definition of work itself. So, in our quest to find the primary meaning of Melakhah, we will need to continue to look elsewhere.

There are two other narratives in the Talmud to explain the rationale behind the Shabbat prohibitions. I will present them in my next post.

Based on: A New Responsum on the Sabbath. Rabbi Mordecai Schwartz and Rabbi Chaim Weiner

Electricity / Electronics / Electric Cars (2) – The Meaning of Shabbat

In my previous post, I introduced this series of posts on driving electric cars on Shabbat. Before delving into the halakhic sources – want to first reflect on the meaning of Shabbat itself.

Shabbat is one of the foundations of our faith. The idea appears in the first chapter of Genesis as the pinnacle of God’s creation of the world. It is one of the Ten Commandments, given to the children of Israel as part of the revelation on Mount Sinai. It is repeated in fourteen separate passages in the Torah and in every one of its books. It occupies an entire tractate in the Mishnah and the Talmud. It is hard to imagine a life of mitzvot that doesn’t have the idea of the seventh day dedicated as a day of rest at its heart.

Shabbat is first and foremost a day of rest. The earliest Rabbis elaborated on the idea of Shabbat, drawing from subtle references in the Torah and developing a great number of halakhot they described as ‘mountains suspended by hairs’ from the all-but-hidden clues they found in the Torah.  As we shall see, our Sages defined Shabbat-proscribed labours with pronounced detail. From the details they created narratives of work and rest that allowed them to develop and refine the day and make it a time for the elevation of the human spirit. This subtle point—Shabbat as a time to raise up the human heart—long remained an implicit understanding of Shabbat. 

The understanding of Shabbat as a counterbalance to technology is deeply embedded in the thinking of the Conservative Movement (and the wider Jewish community) through the writings of our revered teacher Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel.

Technology is one of the key features of modern life.

Technical civilization stems primarily from the desire of man to subdue and manage the forces of nature. The manufacture of tools, the art of spinning and farm­ing, the building of houses, the craft of sailing—all this goes on in man’s spatial surroundings. The mind’s preoccupation with things of space affects, to this day, all activities of man.

(Heschel, The Sabbath. pg. 3-4)

Shabbat is a time to put technology to the side and to focus on spiritual life, on our relationship with God and with each other.

The meaning of the Sabbath is to celebrate time rather than space. Six days a week we live under the tyranny of things of space; on the Sabbath, we try to become attuned to holiness in time. it is a day on which we are called upon to share in what is eternal in time, to turn from the results of creation to the mystery of creation; from the world of creation to the creation of the world.

(pg. 10)

This is the task of men: to conquer space and sanc­tify time.

We must conquer space in order to sanctify time. All week long we are called upon to sanctify life through employing things of space. On the Sabbath, it is given us to share in the holiness that is in the heart of time. Even when the soul is seared, even when no prayer can come out of our tightened throats, the clean, silent rest of the Sabbath leads us to a realm of endless peace, or to the beginning of an awareness of what eternity means. There are few ideas in the world of thought which contain so much spiritual power as the idea of the Sabbath. Aeons hence, when of many of our cher­ished theories only shreds will remain, that cosmic tapestry will continue to shine. 

(pg. 101)

It is from this perspective we will consider the place of electric vehicles in our Shabbat observance in the coming posts.

Based on: A New Responsum on the Sabbath. Rabbi Mordecai Schwartz and Rabbi Chaim Weiner.

Electricity / Electronics / Electric Cars (1)- Revisiting Shabbat in the Age of Technolgy

It has been a while since I last posted on this blog. I was recently asked to write a responsum for the Masorti Movement on the use of electric cars on Shabbat. This provided an opportunity for me to review some of the basic laws of Shabbat, the discussion around the use of electricity on Shabbat, technological change and the way that the halacha deals with these changes. The responsum that I wrote (together with my colleague Mordecai Schwartz) was quite a lengthy and technical piece. I have therefore decided to produce a more accessible version of it to share on this blog. I will break it down into multiple sections over several weeks. I hope you enjoy it.

It is possible to address the question of driving an electric car on Shabbat in a narrow sense: clarifying what actions one undertakes when driving an electric car and determining if these actions are permitted or not. It is also possible to take a much wider view of this question. We have chosen this second path.

We have chosen to see driving a car on Shabbat as one of many examples of cases where developing technology threatens to render part of the Jewish tradition irrelevant. It is not hard to imagine a world in which people no longer do physical ‘work’ in the traditional sense, where the normative rules of Shabbat would not apply. A world in which lights turn themselves on, home heating adjusts itself automatically to the outside world, where food cooks itself and cars drive themselves without any close human intervention. What is the meaning of a day of rest in a world in which most people no longer work?

The same thing is happening in other areas of our lives. What will Kashrut look like when food comes out of petri dishes or is printed on 3D printers? Will the categories of Meat and Milk disappear? Will sanctifying one’s life through the food they eat cease to be part of our tradition? What do you do with such profound changes? How do we address these changes in a meaningful way?

Social and technological change isn’t a new phenomenon at all. Jewish law has undergone profound change over the centuries. The Conservative Movement in Judaism was established as a response to change. One of the mottos of the Movement – Tradition and Change – sees the movement as defined by its approach to change, specifically its ability to further the preservation of Jewish tradition through a process of guided change.

It is our belief that in the face of such unprecedented change. it is our duty to reimagine Jewish practice and to adapt it to the new reality, Technological innovation may make some of our traditional practices seem irrelevant, but the core values of our tradition remain as important today as at any time in the past. In our rapidly changing society, traditional Jewish values are more important than ever. Tradition and Change doesn’t mean undermining traditional practice in the face of change but rather recasting it in a form in which it will retain its relevance in the Modern World.

Our approach to the question of driving an electric car on Shabbat is to attempt to reimagine Shabbat for a world where most of the traditional categories of Melakhah (work) are not relevant. In doing so we will need to have a new look at some of the key elements of a traditional Shabbat: What is the meaning of work on Shabbat? What is a Melakhah and how was this definition reached? What is the relationship between ‘not working’ and ‘resting’. How do you define ‘rest’? What part of Shabbat practice is Rabbinic and what comes from the Torah? After setting out our approach to these questions, we will give a ruling on driving an electric car as an example of how our vision of Shabbat can be applied to the many questions new technology poses.

I will continue to investigate these issues in my next post.

Rabbi Chaim Weiner

Based on: A New Responsum on the Sabbath. Rabbi Mordecai Schwartz and Rabbi Chaim Weiner.

Tefillin During Chol HaMoed

Question: Are you supposed to wear Tefillin during the Intermediate days of Festivals? I see different customs in the synagogue. Where do these customs come from?

Answer: The Talmud states:

Rabbi Akiva says: One might have thought that a person should don phylacteries on Shabbatot and Festivals. The verse [therefore] states: “And it shall be for a sign for you on your arm, and for a remembrance between your eyes. [This teaches that the obligation to don phylacteries applies when the Jewish people] require a sign, to exclude Shabbatot and Festivals, as they themselves are signs. [Menachot 36b]

This teaches us that one doesn’t wear tefillin on Shabbat or a festival. The Talmud makes no mention of the status of Tefillin on the Intermediate Days of Festivals [Hol HaMoed]. This is a source of ambiguity that gave rise to multiple different customs.

The Zohar, [Quoted in the Beit Yosef, OH 31] on the other hand, specifically states that one does not wear tefillin during Hol HaMoed. As a result of this, halachic traditions that are influenced by the Zohar have determined that one does not wear tefillin in during the Hol HaMoed. This includes Sefardi and Hasidic communities. This was also the opinion of Rabbi Elijah of Vilna (known also as the ‘Vilna Gaon’, or simply ‘The Gaon’). Since the students of the Gaon were among the first immigrants to Israel in modern times, his opinions have had a huge influence on the development of Ashkenazi customs in the Land of Israel. Therefore, in Israel, neither Sefardim nor Ashkenazim don tefillin on Hol Mamoed. This has become a universal custom and an individual whose custom is to don tefillin on Hol HaMoed is expected to do so privately at home before the service, but not wear them publicly in a community.

The Ashkenazi tradition is more complicated. Although the Talmud does not directly address the question of tefillin during Hol HaMoed, it does discuss whether one is allowed to write tefillin during the festival. The Mishnah states that One may not write Torah scrolls, phylacteries, or Mezuzot on the tntermediate days of the festival … Rabbi Yehuda says: One may write phylacteries and mezuzot for himself. [Mishnah, MK 3:4].

The simple reading of this Mishnah is that one is not allowed to do the formal professional work of a scribe but it is permitted to write in a private capacity. However, Rashi interprets this as meaning that one is only allowed to write tefillin on the intermediate days of a Festival if he needs them to fulfil the Mitzvah on that day. The reason is that generally one is only allowed to do work on the festival that can’t be put off to a later date. [This is called Davar HaAved –  דבר האבד]

From this comment, we can infer that one is required to don tefillin in the intermediate days of the festival. That is the Ashkenazi custom outside of Israel.

Even if one is required to put on tefillin during a festival, it doesn’t mean that they should be worn throughout the entire prayer service. The custom is to wear them only for a part of the service, and then take them off. This shows that the day is a half-holiday – both a normal weekday and a festival.

But at what point do you take them off? There are three possibilities. Some people take them off just before the Hallel service. The reason for this is that Hallel is the first part of the morning surface which is unique for the festival. Therefore, one wears the tefillin for the weekday service but not for the festival prayers. This is the most common custom amongst Ashkenazi communities.

Another possibility is to take the tefillin off immediately after the Hallel prayer. The reason is that this is the end of the shacharit service. It is better not to make an unnecessary break in the middle of a service but to do so in a natural break.

The third option is to take off the tefillin immediately before the Musaf Prayer. The reason for this is that Musaf is a separate prayer service and doesn’t not require the tefillin.

As there is no ruling, in the case of multiple practices in different communities one should follow the local custom of their home community.

There are a few interesting customs that are worth pointing out. In some Ashkenazi communities, the public removes their tefillin just before Hallel, but the Hazan waits until after the Hallel before removing his tefillin. The reason is that the Hallel comes at the end of the public repetition of the Amidah. The public has finished reciting the Amidah and therefore are free to remove their tefillin. The Hazan, who is in the middle of reciting the Amidah, should wait until the end of the service to remove his tefillin.

Another interesting custom is that on the 3^rd day of Pesach, everyone waits until after the Torah reading before removing their tefillin, even if their normal custom is to remove them earlier. The reason for this is that the Torah Reading on the first day of Pesach talks about the commandment to wear tefillin. It is considered inappropriate to read about the commandment of tefillin but not to actually wear them. Therefore, we delay taking off our tefillin until after the Torah Reading on that day.

Finally, in some communities the tefillin are removed before Hallel during Succot, but after the Torah Reading during Pesach. The reason is that during Succot the Hallel is particularly festive. During Hallel, we hold and shake the lulav at several points during the recitation of the psalms. On Pesach, the Hallel isn’t special at all. We only read the half-Hallel and not the full prayer. Therefore, we wait until Mussaf which is a more special prayer on that day.

Rabbi Chaim Weiner

Nissan 5783

With thanks to Michael Blane for sponsoring this post.