A Matter of Life or Death (I)

The Shulchan Aruch (O”Ch 328:2) rules, “Some one that has a life threatening disease, it is a mitzvah to violate shabbos for him.  The one who rushes is praised, and the one who asks is [as if he] spills blood.”  The Yerushalmi that he is quoting adds, “The one that is asked is disgusting.”  He, being the Rabbi in town, is disgusting either because he should have publicly announced this law, or because he made everyone afraid of doing anything with out his permission.  If this is true, how does one know when to rush?  The Shulchan Aruch (O”Ch 328:10) also rules, “A doubt in life [threatening situations] is lenient,” meaning that one is lenient regarding the violation of shabbos.  This is the overriding principle, and the Shulchan Aruch (O”Ch 328:15) rules, “If [doctors] estimate that he needs one date [to be healed], and ten people run and each [violate shabbos to] bring him a date, all of them . . . have good reward from Hashem, even though he was already healed from the first,” and the others were unnecessary.

Is There a Doctor in Shul?

Over the next few weeks, I would like to discuss a general set of laws that are not connected to any one of the 39 melachos.  There are many categories of sick people, and each one of them has different laws with regards to shabbos.  The most basic is choleh sh’yesh bo sakanah, someone deathly ill.  In general, one may violate any issur, prohibition, to save his life.  For a non-life-threatening illness, all Biblical prohibitions are in force, but various Rabbinic prohibitions are waived.  Some one that has mild aches, has added prohibitions over a healthy person.  I would like to discuss each of these separately and outline exactly what is and isn’t permitted for each.

Up a Tree (II)

The gemara discusses a case in which one has a small water channel with a tree growing in the middle.  Is it permitted to use a portion of the tree that is more than three tefachim from the bottom of the channel, but within three tefachim of the top?  The gemara answers that this is dependant on the dispute between Rabbah and Rav Sheshes.  Rashi explains that according to Rabbah on measures from the side and it is permitted, and according to Rav Sheshes one measures from the bottom and it is prohibited.

Why is it obvious that Rabbah measures from the top of the channel, and Rav Sheshes from the bottom.  While I did not see anyone who discusses this issue, it seems to me that one can understand it from the gemara’s explanation of there opinions.  Rabbah holds that “anything within three [tefachim] of the ground is like ground”.  This seems to be the concept of lavud, that we ignore any gap of less than three tefachim.  If so, the reason that trees can be used below three tefachim is because it is halachicly considered ground and not tree.  If so, it is obvious that any place on the tree that is within three tefachim of the ground is permitted, even if the tree starts below present ground level.  Rav Sheshes believes that the prohibition is to use a tree above three tefachim.  He measures three tefachim up from the bottom of the tree, and everything above is prohibited.  Therefore we do not care if there is ground around part of the tree, we measure from the start of the tree.

Up a Tree (I)

It is prohibited on Shabbos to disconnect any living thing from its life source.  Included in this is reaping wheat, plucking apples, and tearing a branch off a tree.  Among many Rabbinic prohibitions in this area, the Rabbis forbade climbing or using a tree on Shabbos.  They were concerned that one would pluck fruit from the tree with out thinking.  As is normally the case with Rabbinic decrees, they made a blanket decree that includes all trees.  A tree is defined as a vegetative growth attached to the ground that is somewhat stiff, or will become so.  The prohibition only applies to that part of the tree that is more than three tefachim (24 cm) above the ground.  (However some prohibit the use of all fruit trees, even if they are under three tefachim.)

There is a dispute in the gemara about a branch that comes out of the tree above three tefachim and then dips down to with in three tefachim.  Is it permitted to use the lower portion of the branch?  Rabbah rules that it is permitted and Rav Sheshes rules that it is prohibited.  Rabbah’s logic is that “anything within three [tefachim] of the ground is like ground”.  Rav Sheshes’s logic is that “since it grows from something that is prohibited, it is [also] prohibited”.

Building and Destroying: How Goodly are Your Tents? (III)

Now we can discuss a few practical cases.  The first case is the umbrella.  According to the third approach above, it would seem to be an open and shut case.  An umbrella is clearly pre-made and collapsible.  It would seem from here that it would be permitted.  While the Chazon Ish follows this line of reasoning, he rules in practice that it is prohibited due to it’s looking like a non-Shabbos activity.  (However there are those that rule that it is a biblical prohibition.)

The next case would be holding a talis over the heads of people.  While it would seem to be prohibited because it is used for shade, it seems to be explicitly permitted in the gemara.  This is the case mentioned above that one may first hold a talis and then stand up beds to support it.  The gemara assumed that it was obvious that it is permitted to hold the talis for shade.

The last case is covering a crib with a blanket.  This is clearly prohibited because one is creating a protective tent over the crib.  However it would be permitted if there was already a tefach of blanket spread before shabbos.

Building and Destroying: How Goodly are Your Tents? (II)

Even though it is prohibited to make a halachic tent, there are various cases in which is could be allowed.  The first is mosif al ohel array.  This means that it is permitted to make a temporary addition to an already existing ohel.  This can be done in one of two ways.  The first is that if you have a tefach (between 8 and 10 cm) of covering, it is permitted to extend it.  The second is that if one has an ohel using the halachic principle of lavud, you can fully cover it.  This means that if one has an open roof, but it has cross beams (or even fine string) stretched across it, at intervals of less than three tefachim, you can cover over the space.  According to the Mishna Brurah one can combine these two concepts, and even if there is only one place that has two cross beams within three tefachim, but covering a total of more than one tefach, one can extend from this to cover the entire area.

The second way in which it is mutar to make an ohel is melma’aleh lemateh.  This means that if first one builds the top, and then one brings the wall, it is mutar to make.  While I do not have a clear proof, it seems to me that this would apply even with an ohel without walls.  If you bring the top before the supports, I believe that it would also be mutar.  The proof for this is a gemara that discusses making a covering over a dead person to protect from the sun.  The gemara says that one may hold a talis over his head, and then bring standup beds to support the talis.  The last way in which it is mutar to make an ohel is avid v’kay.  This means that any ohel that is not made out of parts, rather is collapsible, is mutar to put up on shabbos.

Building and Destroying: How Goodly are Your Tents?

The last toldah of binyan is ohel, tent.  The d’Oraysa is to create a permanent halachic tent; however, the more practical aspect is ohel array , the rabbinic prohibition to create even a temporary halachic tent.

The first thing that must be defined is the definition of a halachic tent.  Firstly, a vertical partition is not considered a tent unless it serves as a halachic border.  (An example would be a third wall for a suka or a partition to create a private domain.  A partition between men and women during prayer would be permitted to make.)  Secondly, even a horizontal partition is only prohibited if either it is made to protect the area underneath, or it is made to use the area underneath.  A table would be permitted to make, even though it covers a space, because the main use of a table is to eat on top and not to put things underneath.  Even so, we assume that any covering with four walls is prohibited because one can put things underneath.