Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: A Living Being Lightens Itself and Carries Itself

Rashi (explaining the mishna at the bottom of Shabbos 93b, and elucidated by yours truly here.) says that חי נושא אה עצמו/a living being carries itself means that a living being lightens itself. You may be (and, I daresay, should be) asking yourself: What in the world does that mean?

Perhaps you think it means "a living thing feels lighter... it can adjust itself and stuff." I respectfully submit that you should think again. First, Rashi does't say "makes itself feel lighter", but "makes itself lighter". Moreover, R' Moshe (Igros Moshe, O. Ch. IV, 90) explains that Rashi means that the כבדות/heaviness is less that expected for something of that משקל/weight and volume. Again, not "seems", just "is". You may argue that the "seems" is self-understood and obvious. I disagree; respectfully. Lastly, I think a mean-tempered cat (and what cat is not mean-tempered) is much easier to carry when bound.

But, wait, there's more. The halacha of חי נושא אה עצמו does not apply to someone (or some critter) who is neither sick nor bound. Again, you may be (and, I daresay, should be) asking yourself: How sick? I mean, is it enough to have a broken nail or a splinter? If not, how about a terrible flu? If not, how about a coma?

But wait, there's more. חי נושא אה עצמו doesn't even apply to someone (or some critter) who is bound. The rope, chain, duct tape, whatever you fancy is certainly not בטל/nullified by the guy/critter. That guy/critter certainly wants them off and the perpetrator certainly wants them in place. That being the case, whether or not the bound guy/critter carries him/itself -- or is even there at all -- is completely irrelevant; the rope, chain, duct tape, whatever you fancy does not carry itself.

But wait, there is even more. An infant is considered bound. What?! Yes, an infant who can not walk under his own power -- though fully and delightfully and cutefully alive -- is considered bound with regards to the halacha of חי נושא אה עצמו.

My newest granddaughter, now all of a few months old, is working with a psychology graduate student. They have the same name, so they thought it would be cute to work together. Anyway, the grad student is working with my granddaughter to determine at what point an infant realizes that she is in control of the movement of her own limbs. (She has the cutest little cap with electrodes, though she doesn't really care for the fashion statement. Women. Of all ages. Nuff said. Probably too much.) The point is, I realized, the reason a child cannot walk has less to do with strength than their inability to move their limbs with כוונה/intention.

Ah ha! How sick does a living being need to lose the status of חי נושא אה עצמו? When it is unable to move its limbs with כוונה to propel itself. As noted above, "bound" has nothing to do with חי נושא אה עצמו, the halacha includes bound to explain how sick; or in the case of an infant, how young. Very good, then, once a living being is not connected enough to its own body to move it, then it is also not connected enough to lighten itself and thus assist in carrying itself. If, though, a living being has enough umph to move its own body with כוונה, then that umph is also enough to lighten itself enough to be considered a helpful participant in carrying itself.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Pizza, Uncrustables, and Stuff -- What Bracha?

Many years ago (in fact, more than two decades ago), I called R' Fuerst from my desk at work as I sat down to lunch.  I had a piece of (quite delicious) homemade pizza for lunch.  I nearly always eat at my desk as I am working (or writing TftD...), so my lunch at work cannot in any way be considered as sitting down to a formal meal; aka קביעת סעודה.  That being the case, I wasn't sure whether to wash, say ha'motzi, and bentch; or was the pizza downgraded to a m'zonos.  He told if it was a snack, then it's m'zonos; if a meal the ha'motzi.  Which what I have always done since then.  I recently found out how/why that works. The Shulchan Aruch, 168:17 discusses פשטיד''א, which is describes as a baked dough with meat or fish or cheese.  In other words: pizza.  Note: while the dough doesn't not need to be baked together with the meat/fish/cheese, it is  required that they dough was baked with the intention of making this concoction. ...

Thought for the Day: What Category of Muktzeh are Our Candles?

As discussed in a recent TftD , a p'sak halacha quite surprising to many, that one may -- even לכתחילה -- decorate a birthday cake with (unlit, obviously) birthday candles on Shabbos. That p'sak is predicated on another p'sak halacha; namely, that our candles are muktzeh because they are a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not  מוקצה מחמת גופו/intrinsically set aside from any use on Shabbos. They point there was that using the candle as a decoration qualifies as a need that allows one to utilize a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור. Today we will discuss the issue of concluding that our candles are , in fact, a כלי שמלאכתו לאיסור and not מוקצה מחמת גופו. Along the way we'll also (again) how important it is to have personal relationship with your rav/posek, the importance of precision in vocabulary, and how to interpret the Mishna Brura.  Buckle up. After reviewing siman 308 and the Mishna Brura there, I concluded that it should be permissible to use birthday candles to decorate a cake on Sha...

Thought for the Day: Why Halacha Has "b'di'avad"

There was this Jew who knew every "b'di'avad" (aka, "Biddy Eved", the old spinster librarian) in the book.  When ever he was called on something, his reply was invariably, "biddy eved, it's fine".  When he finally left this world and was welcomed to Olam Haba, he was shown to a little, damp closet with a bare 40W bulb hanging from the ceiling.  He couldn't believe his eyes and said in astonishment, "This is Olam Haba!?!"  "Yes, Reb Biddy Eved,  for you this is Olam Haba." b'di'avad gets used like that; f you don't feel like doing something the best way, do it the next (or less) best way.  But Chazal tell us that "kol ha'omer HaShem vatran, m'vater al chayav" -- anyone who thinks HaShem gives partial credit is fooling himself to death (free translation.  Ok, really, really free translation; but its still true).  HaShem created us and this entire reality for one and only one purpose: for use...