Anonymous

Animals on Shabbat: Difference between revisions

From Halachipedia
m
Text replacement - "Shemirat Shabbat" to "Shemirat Shabbat"
m (Text replacement - "Shemirat Shabbat" to "Shemirat Shabbat")
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
Line 3: Line 3:
==Letting one's Animal Rest on Shabbat==
==Letting one's Animal Rest on Shabbat==
# Letting one's animal rest and not do the 39 Melachot on [[Shabbat]] is a Biblical commandment from the Pasuk לְמַעַן יָנוּחַ, שׁוֹרְךָ וַחֲמֹרֶךָ. The prohibition is called [[Shevitat Behemto]]. <ref> Shemot 23:12 is the source of [[Shevitat Behemto]]. Rambam [[Shabbat]] 20:1 brings it as halacha as does Yalkut Yosef [[Shabbat]] vol 1: pg. 33. </ref>
# Letting one's animal rest and not do the 39 Melachot on [[Shabbat]] is a Biblical commandment from the Pasuk לְמַעַן יָנוּחַ, שׁוֹרְךָ וַחֲמֹרֶךָ. The prohibition is called [[Shevitat Behemto]]. <ref> Shemot 23:12 is the source of [[Shevitat Behemto]]. Rambam [[Shabbat]] 20:1 brings it as halacha as does Yalkut Yosef [[Shabbat]] vol 1: pg. 33. </ref>
# One shouldn't take an animal out on [[Shabbat]] beyond the eruv with anything that doesn't benefit the animal. <ref> Shulchan Aruch 305:1. </ref> There is discussion if this applies to a tag. <ref> Shulchan Aruch 305:17 extends this to a tag. Aruch Hashulchan 305:5 rules stringently even though nowadays a tag shows that the animal has an owner and should not be put to death because of the fear of rabies. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach cited in Shemirat [[Shabbat]] Kehilchata 27 footnote 33 disagrees since these tags are worn for the benefit of the dog. </ref>   
# One shouldn't take an animal out on [[Shabbat]] beyond the eruv with anything that doesn't benefit the animal. <ref> Shulchan Aruch 305:1. </ref> There is discussion if this applies to a tag. <ref> Shulchan Aruch 305:17 extends this to a tag. Aruch Hashulchan 305:5 rules stringently even though nowadays a tag shows that the animal has an owner and should not be put to death because of the fear of rabies. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach cited in Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 27 footnote 33 disagrees since these tags are worn for the benefit of the dog. </ref>   
# Renting out one's work animal (such as a horse, mule, or donkey) to a non-Jew for [[Shabbat]] is forbidden because the non-Jew may do work with it. <ref> S”A 246:3  </ref>
# Renting out one's work animal (such as a horse, mule, or donkey) to a non-Jew for [[Shabbat]] is forbidden because the non-Jew may do work with it. <ref> S”A 246:3  </ref>
# It's permissible to give to a goy one's animal for [[Shabbat]] as long as one doesn't collect a rental fee. <ref> The dispute in the Rishonim is brought by the Bet Yosef 305:23:
# It's permissible to give to a goy one's animal for [[Shabbat]] as long as one doesn't collect a rental fee. <ref> The dispute in the Rishonim is brought by the Bet Yosef 305:23:
Line 31: Line 31:
* Rav Moshe Feinstein's opinion although quoted by Rabbi Bodner in Tiltulei Shabbos p. 118 and the corresponding teshuva in Igrot Moshe 5:22:21 further reiterates this point. Nonetheless, in the emendations of R' Mordechai Tendler and R' Shabtay Rappaport of that volume of Igrot Moshe it appears that pets are not muktzeh. In a letter to Rabbi Tzvi Ryzman Ryzman (Moriah v. 36 pp. 358-359), R' Rappaport explains the emendation and that it was approved by Rav Moshe Feinstein. See [https://seforimblog.com/2020/06/pets-on-shabbat-rabbi-morenu-and-epidemics/ seforimblog.com] for more sources on Rav Moshe's opinions about pets on Shabbat.
* Rav Moshe Feinstein's opinion although quoted by Rabbi Bodner in Tiltulei Shabbos p. 118 and the corresponding teshuva in Igrot Moshe 5:22:21 further reiterates this point. Nonetheless, in the emendations of R' Mordechai Tendler and R' Shabtay Rappaport of that volume of Igrot Moshe it appears that pets are not muktzeh. In a letter to Rabbi Tzvi Ryzman Ryzman (Moriah v. 36 pp. 358-359), R' Rappaport explains the emendation and that it was approved by Rav Moshe Feinstein. See [https://seforimblog.com/2020/06/pets-on-shabbat-rabbi-morenu-and-epidemics/ seforimblog.com] for more sources on Rav Moshe's opinions about pets on Shabbat.
* However, Sh"t Halachot Ketanot 45 is lenient and Sh"t Merosh Tzurim 38:6 quotes that Rav Mordechai Eliyahu was lenient as well as the opinion of Rav Aharon Lichtenstein that one shouldn't admonish those who are lenient though proper conduct would be to be stringent. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in Shulchan Shlomo vol. 2, 308:74 is also lenient. See [http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/english/halacha/jachter_1.htm Rabbi Jachter's article here] regarding the whole issue.</ref> Touching however, is permitted (as with all other [[muktzeh]] items). <ref> Yalkut Yosef [[Shabbat]] vol. 2 pg. 383 </ref>  
* However, Sh"t Halachot Ketanot 45 is lenient and Sh"t Merosh Tzurim 38:6 quotes that Rav Mordechai Eliyahu was lenient as well as the opinion of Rav Aharon Lichtenstein that one shouldn't admonish those who are lenient though proper conduct would be to be stringent. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in Shulchan Shlomo vol. 2, 308:74 is also lenient. See [http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/english/halacha/jachter_1.htm Rabbi Jachter's article here] regarding the whole issue.</ref> Touching however, is permitted (as with all other [[muktzeh]] items). <ref> Yalkut Yosef [[Shabbat]] vol. 2 pg. 383 </ref>  
#  According to some poskim, if the animal is in a cage or tank, then the whole cage or tank becomes [[muktzeh]] as a base for the [[muktzeh]] animals themselves. <ref> Yabia Omer OC 5:26, [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/Display.asp?ClipDate=6/24/2008 Rabbi Eli Mansour] </ref> Others disagree. <ref> Shemirat [[Shabbat]] kihilchatah 18:footnote 62, 27:footnote 96 </ref>
#  According to some poskim, if the animal is in a cage or tank, then the whole cage or tank becomes [[muktzeh]] as a base for the [[muktzeh]] animals themselves. <ref> Yabia Omer OC 5:26, [http://www.dailyhalacha.com/Display.asp?ClipDate=6/24/2008 Rabbi Eli Mansour] </ref> Others disagree. <ref> Shemirat Shabbat kihilchatah 18:footnote 62, 27:footnote 96 </ref>
# A blind person who uses a dog to help him walk my do so on [[Shabbat]] even with a leash because he doesn't carry the dog. <ref> Yalkut Yosef vol. 2 pg. 384 </ref> Others permit it since it is designated to be used and isn't even muktzeh.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat Khilchata ch. 18 fnt. 62</ref>
# A blind person who uses a dog to help him walk my do so on [[Shabbat]] even with a leash because he doesn't carry the dog. <ref> Yalkut Yosef vol. 2 pg. 384 </ref> Others permit it since it is designated to be used and isn't even muktzeh.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat Khilchata ch. 18 fnt. 62</ref>
# Someone who has a dog as a pet and needs to walk it daily, may do so on [[Shabbat]], but he shouldn't lift it. If one is going in a reshut harabim one must be careful that he doesn't let the leash hang by more than a [[tefach]] from his hand. <ref> Shulchan Aruch 305:16, Yalkut Yosef [[Shabbat]] vol. 2 pg. 385. Shulchan Aruch 305:16 adds that one should make sure to hold it so that the leash doesn't hang within a [[tefach]] of the ground </ref> One should avoid walking an animal beyond the eruv with anything that does not benefit the animal itself. <ref> Shulchan Aruch 305:1 </ref> There is a dispute if this applies to a tag. <ref> Shulchan Aruch 305:17, Aruch Hashulchan 305:5 rules stringently even though nowadays a tag shows that the animal has an owner and should not be put to death because of the fear of rabies. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach cited in Shemirat [[Shabbat]] Kehilchata 27, footnote 33 disagrees since these tags are worn for the benefit of the dog. </ref>  
# Someone who has a dog as a pet and needs to walk it daily, may do so on [[Shabbat]], but he shouldn't lift it. If one is going in a reshut harabim one must be careful that he doesn't let the leash hang by more than a [[tefach]] from his hand. <ref> Shulchan Aruch 305:16, Yalkut Yosef [[Shabbat]] vol. 2 pg. 385. Shulchan Aruch 305:16 adds that one should make sure to hold it so that the leash doesn't hang within a [[tefach]] of the ground </ref> One should avoid walking an animal beyond the eruv with anything that does not benefit the animal itself. <ref> Shulchan Aruch 305:1 </ref> There is a dispute if this applies to a tag. <ref> Shulchan Aruch 305:17, Aruch Hashulchan 305:5 rules stringently even though nowadays a tag shows that the animal has an owner and should not be put to death because of the fear of rabies. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach cited in Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 27, footnote 33 disagrees since these tags are worn for the benefit of the dog. </ref>  
# A person can put a leash on a dog on Shabbat to alleviate its suffering.<ref>shulchan Aruch 308:40, Halachos of Muktzeh p. 119</ref>
# A person can put a leash on a dog on Shabbat to alleviate its suffering.<ref>shulchan Aruch 308:40, Halachos of Muktzeh p. 119</ref>
# One is permitted to move a pet to alleviate its suffering. <ref> Sh"t Yabia Omer 5:26. See Chazon Ish 52:16 who permits for tzaar baalei chayim and a concern of a loss. Az Nidbaru 1:79:110 explains that the Chazon Ish was only lenient when both factors apply. Although Magen Avraham 305:11 says that the laws of [[muktzeh]] aren't waived for tzaar baalei chayim, Eliya Rabba 305:18 disagrees. Shulchan Aruch Harav 305:26 says that one can be lenient if it will cause great loss. Mishna Brurah 305:70 quotes both opinions and concludes that one can surely make use of a non-Jew to move it in such a situation. See also Shemirat [[Shabbat]] Kehilchita 27:28 and 30 and footnote 98 </ref>  
# One is permitted to move a pet to alleviate its suffering. <ref> Sh"t Yabia Omer 5:26. See Chazon Ish 52:16 who permits for tzaar baalei chayim and a concern of a loss. Az Nidbaru 1:79:110 explains that the Chazon Ish was only lenient when both factors apply. Although Magen Avraham 305:11 says that the laws of [[muktzeh]] aren't waived for tzaar baalei chayim, Eliya Rabba 305:18 disagrees. Shulchan Aruch Harav 305:26 says that one can be lenient if it will cause great loss. Mishna Brurah 305:70 quotes both opinions and concludes that one can surely make use of a non-Jew to move it in such a situation. See also Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchita 27:28 and 30 and footnote 98 </ref>  
# It is forbidden to place something on an animal or remove it from an animal on [[Shabbat]], nor may one lean on an animal on [[Shabbat]].<ref> 39 Melachot (vol 3, pg 301) based on Shulchan Aruch 305:8, 18 </ref>
# It is forbidden to place something on an animal or remove it from an animal on [[Shabbat]], nor may one lean on an animal on [[Shabbat]].<ref> 39 Melachot (vol 3, pg 301) based on Shulchan Aruch 305:8, 18 </ref>
# Moving muktzeh in a slight fashion, moving part of it without moving it completely, is forbidden. <ref>The Ran 51b writes that moving an item in a slight fashion (Tiltul Bmiksat) is forbidden. See Eliya Rabba 311:23. Bet Yosef 308:40 quotes this as the halacha. Pri Megadim M"Z 336:4 and Mishna Brurah 308:151 agree.</ref> Therefore, some say that it is forbidden to pet an animal on Shabbat.<ref>Sheilat Shlomo 1:172, Piskei Teshuvot 308 fnt. 446</ref> Others are lenient.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 302:11 writes that it is permitted to wipe one’s dirty hands on a horse tail. Biur Halacha quotes the Tosefet Shabbat who is bothered that it is moving muktzeh. Biur Halacha answers that perhaps the hair isn’t part of the animal itself and isn’t muktzeh. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (v. 3 ch. 27 fnt. 53) suggested that the hair isn’t muktzeh since it is designated for using to clean one’s hands. Rav Nevinsal in Byitzchak Yikareh 302:11 echoes this idea.</ref>
# Moving muktzeh in a slight fashion, moving part of it without moving it completely, is forbidden. <ref>The Ran 51b writes that moving an item in a slight fashion (Tiltul Bmiksat) is forbidden. See Eliya Rabba 311:23. Bet Yosef 308:40 quotes this as the halacha. Pri Megadim M"Z 336:4 and Mishna Brurah 308:151 agree.</ref> Therefore, some say that it is forbidden to pet an animal on Shabbat.<ref>Sheilat Shlomo 1:172, Piskei Teshuvot 308 fnt. 446</ref> Others are lenient.<ref>Shulchan Aruch 302:11 writes that it is permitted to wipe one’s dirty hands on a horse tail. Biur Halacha quotes the Tosefet Shabbat who is bothered that it is moving muktzeh. Biur Halacha answers that perhaps the hair isn’t part of the animal itself and isn’t muktzeh. Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (v. 3 ch. 27 fnt. 53) suggested that the hair isn’t muktzeh since it is designated for using to clean one’s hands. Rav Nevinsal in Byitzchak Yikareh 302:11 echoes this idea.</ref>
Anonymous user