In my youth, we all understood and knew that the Shabbat restrictions in the ancient world were an accommodation to how hard life was. Building a fire was hard without matches, after all. We also knew that the ancients did not know about trichinosis. They were also unable to notice that some shellfish were poisonous only in months that have an 'R' in them (or whatever the ancient equivalent was). Because of all that and more, we were able to conclude two things as obvious: (1) The smart Jewish nation (Jews have always been smart, you see) banned work on Shabbat and eating pork and shellfish. (2) None of that is relevant today, so us modern and reformed Jews could gleefully life a life without restrictions while calling ourselves faithful to our religion.
Then I grew up and learned that carrying even a key in your pocket is forbidden on Shabbos, the ancients knew how to cook meat well, and people who lived in the sea definitely knew many more details about the denizens of the deep than I do. That got me thinking... so -- in epic "let's make a long story short" form -- I became frum.
The prohibition to carry -- that is, to transport something from one place to another in to, out of, or through a public domain -- on Shabbos is one of the most difficult to understand and counter-intuitive of all the Shabbos prohibitions. It just really, really doesn't seem like work. Throw in the mix that (except for the overarching rule of "not in the spirit of the day") one is permitted to carry as much, as often, and as far as one cares to within a private domain. It makes it very difficult to get one's head around what the root cause of this prohibition is. In fact, masechta Shabbos of the talmud begins with this very prohibition. Some explain this is specifically because it is so difficult to grasp.
But that's not all! Oh no, before you decide you have an approach, don't forget this rule:
In any case, what is it about a living being that makes it carry-able (at the Torah level)? There are two basic approaches. Rashi says because healthy, living being lightens itself. (Hence the term "dead weight"; no, really, that's what Rashi means.) The other approach is that of the Ba'al Me'or (as explained by R' Moshe), that a living, healthy being can get there on it's own power. (This more or less parallels the idea that if two people work together to perform an action that could have been achieved by one person, then they have not transgressed a Torah prohibition; cf "it should go without saying" above.) Thank you, thank you, Dirshu Mishna Brura, 308:41, sk 153, note 155.
What difference does it make? R' Moshe notes that either could be a stringency or a leniency. Again, this is all at the Torah level; it is all forbidden Rabbinically. Imagine someone who is generally healthy, but is unable to walk because of some problems with his feet or legs. According you Rashi, you could still be able to carry him -- he is alive and healthy. According to the Ba'al Me'or, though, since he wouldn't be able to transport himself, it would be forbidden. Likewise, imagine someone who is very ill, but can walk on crutches. According to Rashi, he is sick his life force just doesn't have enough umph to achieve lift off. According to the Ba'al Me'or, though... he can get there, it might be tortuously slow, but he can do it; so you can carry him to get that Slurpee before it melts.
Since it sometimes helps -- when there are other mitigating factors -- to knock a prohibition down to a Rabbinic level, it's good to know these reasons and differences. R' Moshe rule that you need to be stringent like both reasons.
That's really it, and I know this is already longer than usual, so you are dismissed. For the interested reader, though: you may have noticed that the the living being cannot be bound. According to the Ba'al Me'or, that makes perfect sense. According to Rashi, though, why not? I could tell you now, but this is already really long. Besides, I wrestled with that for days before reaching enlightenment. Why would I deny that fun to you?
Then I grew up and learned that carrying even a key in your pocket is forbidden on Shabbos, the ancients knew how to cook meat well, and people who lived in the sea definitely knew many more details about the denizens of the deep than I do. That got me thinking... so -- in epic "let's make a long story short" form -- I became frum.
The prohibition to carry -- that is, to transport something from one place to another in to, out of, or through a public domain -- on Shabbos is one of the most difficult to understand and counter-intuitive of all the Shabbos prohibitions. It just really, really doesn't seem like work. Throw in the mix that (except for the overarching rule of "not in the spirit of the day") one is permitted to carry as much, as often, and as far as one cares to within a private domain. It makes it very difficult to get one's head around what the root cause of this prohibition is. In fact, masechta Shabbos of the talmud begins with this very prohibition. Some explain this is specifically because it is so difficult to grasp.
But that's not all! Oh no, before you decide you have an approach, don't forget this rule:
חי נושא אה עצמו/a living being helps to carry itself.That means, that one does not transgress the Torah prohibition of carrying if the thing he is carrying is a healthy living being that is able to walk on its own. If he is sick or bound, though, he does not carry himself. Riding a horse, for example, would not violate the Torah prohibition to carry, but riding a bicycle would. (It should go without saying, but it never does: There is, of course, a Rabbinic prohibition; so, no, you can't ride your horse nor carry your granddaughter on your shoulders.) Carry your bound kidnap victim, though, would still be forbidden.
In any case, what is it about a living being that makes it carry-able (at the Torah level)? There are two basic approaches. Rashi says because healthy, living being lightens itself. (Hence the term "dead weight"; no, really, that's what Rashi means.) The other approach is that of the Ba'al Me'or (as explained by R' Moshe), that a living, healthy being can get there on it's own power. (This more or less parallels the idea that if two people work together to perform an action that could have been achieved by one person, then they have not transgressed a Torah prohibition; cf "it should go without saying" above.) Thank you, thank you, Dirshu Mishna Brura, 308:41, sk 153, note 155.
What difference does it make? R' Moshe notes that either could be a stringency or a leniency. Again, this is all at the Torah level; it is all forbidden Rabbinically. Imagine someone who is generally healthy, but is unable to walk because of some problems with his feet or legs. According you Rashi, you could still be able to carry him -- he is alive and healthy. According to the Ba'al Me'or, though, since he wouldn't be able to transport himself, it would be forbidden. Likewise, imagine someone who is very ill, but can walk on crutches. According to Rashi, he is sick his life force just doesn't have enough umph to achieve lift off. According to the Ba'al Me'or, though... he can get there, it might be tortuously slow, but he can do it; so you can carry him to get that Slurpee before it melts.
Since it sometimes helps -- when there are other mitigating factors -- to knock a prohibition down to a Rabbinic level, it's good to know these reasons and differences. R' Moshe rule that you need to be stringent like both reasons.
That's really it, and I know this is already longer than usual, so you are dismissed. For the interested reader, though: you may have noticed that the the living being cannot be bound. According to the Ba'al Me'or, that makes perfect sense. According to Rashi, though, why not? I could tell you now, but this is already really long. Besides, I wrestled with that for days before reaching enlightenment. Why would I deny that fun to you?
Comments