Benefiting from a Violation of Shabbat: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
If a Jew does a melacha on Shabbat there is a rabbinic prohibition to benefit from his actions. Some of the factors | If a Jew does a melacha on Shabbat there is a rabbinic prohibition to benefit from his actions. Some of the factors that are relevant to the ramifications of that prohibition are whether it was done intentionally, whether the violation of Shabbat was biblical, and for whom it was done. Also, if a non-Jew does a melacha there is a prohibition to benefit from his actions. That is discussed on the [[Amirah Lenochri]] page. Asking, encouraging, or aiding a Jew to do melacha is forbidden and the details are discussed on the [[Amirah Leyisrael]] page. There the idea of asking another Jew to do something which you are stringent not to do but others are lenient is addressed. | ||
==A Non-Observant Jew== | ==A Non-Observant Jew== | ||
# If a | # If a Jew does a melacha intentionally neither him or any other Jew may benefit from his actions on Shabbat. Others may benefit from it immediately after Shabbat but he may not benefit from it forever.<ref>Shulchan Aruch O.C. 318:1</ref> Even those for whom he did the melacha are considered like others for whom it is permitted after Shabbat.<Ref>Magen Avraham 318:2 initially extends the category of the one who did the melacha to include for whom he did the melacha for. The intention was for them to all directly benefit from the melacha, therefore, the penalty applies to them. However, he notes that the Bet Yosef disagrees and holds that only for nullifying something prohibited are those for whom it was nullified considered like the transgressor himself, however, for Shabbat they are not because there's no concern he is going to continually violate Shabbat for others. Therefore, the Mishna Brurah 318:5, Kaf Hachayim on Shulchan Arukh, Orach Chayim 318:12, and Yalkut Yosef 318:6 all permit others to benefit from the violation of Shabbat right after Shabbat.</ref> | ||
# If a non-observant Jew violates Shabbat consistently every week there is a large dispute whether others may benefit from the melacha even after Shabbat. For example, if a Jewish restaurant is open every week the food is forbidden for everyone.<ref>Kaf Hachayim on Shulchan Arukh, Orach Chayim 318:12 cites the Ketav Sofer OC 50 who holds that only if someone violates Shabbat once do we say that it is permitted for others, however, if he does it every week then the product is forbidden for everyone even after Shabbat. Yalkut Yosef 318:6 is strict. Har Tzvi OC 180 seems to disagree with the Ketav Sofer.</ref> | # If a non-observant Jew violates Shabbat consistently every week there is a large dispute whether others may benefit from the melacha even after Shabbat. For example, if a Jewish restaurant is open every week the food is forbidden for everyone.<ref>Kaf Hachayim on Shulchan Arukh, Orach Chayim 318:12 cites the Ketav Sofer OC 50 who holds that only if someone violates Shabbat once do we say that it is permitted for others, however, if he does it every week then the product is forbidden for everyone even after Shabbat. Yalkut Yosef 318:6 is strict. Har Tzvi OC 180 seems to disagree with the Ketav Sofer.</ref> | ||
# It is permitted to benefit from an action of a non-observant Jew on Shabbat if one doesn't get a direct benefit from the melacha.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 1:34:7 introduction based on Shulchan Aruch O.C. 257:1</ref> | # It is permitted to benefit from an action of a non-observant Jew on Shabbat if one doesn't get a direct benefit from the melacha.<ref>Shemirat Shabbat Kehilchata 1:34:7 introduction based on Shulchan Aruch O.C. 257:1</ref> | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
# If a Jew drove food to an army based and thereby carried it through a public thoroughfare, some permit benefitting from it on Shabbat since the food is unchanged. Obviously, the army must avoid this since it involves transgression of Shabbat.<ref>Chazon Ovadia v. 4 p. 427 based on the Rabbenu Yonah. He cites Kovetz Teshuvot 2:24:3 and Shevet Halevi 3:35 as supports. See Tzitz Eliezer 13:48:5.</ref> | # If a Jew drove food to an army based and thereby carried it through a public thoroughfare, some permit benefitting from it on Shabbat since the food is unchanged. Obviously, the army must avoid this since it involves transgression of Shabbat.<ref>Chazon Ovadia v. 4 p. 427 based on the Rabbenu Yonah. He cites Kovetz Teshuvot 2:24:3 and Shevet Halevi 3:35 as supports. See Tzitz Eliezer 13:48:5.</ref> | ||
# If a Jew walked through an electric door on Shabbat one may not follow them since it is considered benefitting from a Jew's transgression of Shabbat.<ref>Byom Hashabbat 32:18 based on Rav Elyashiv's ruling that it is forbidden to benefit from the contents of a bottle if it was opened by a Jew in a forbidden way, unless there was a permitted way to access it as well.</ref> | # If a Jew walked through an electric door on Shabbat one may not follow them since it is considered benefitting from a Jew's transgression of Shabbat.<ref>Byom Hashabbat 32:18 based on Rav Elyashiv's ruling that it is forbidden to benefit from the contents of a bottle if it was opened by a Jew in a forbidden way, unless there was a permitted way to access it as well.</ref> | ||
# Someone who was brought up non-religious and now did teshuva doesn't need to worry about benefitting from everything in his house that he fixed over the years.<ref>Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Derech Sicha v. 2 p. 277), Shevet Halevi 8:62. They explain that if he was a tinok she'nishba (a child brought up among those who don't know about Torah) then he is considered as though he violated Shabbat unintentionally. Even if he isn't a tinok she'nishba, still he might not have been aware of the particular melachot he violated and thought that they were allowed. Also, he can rely on the Gra who paskens like Rabbi Meir.</ref> | |||
==Something that is a Dispute== | ==Something that is a Dispute== | ||
# One may benefit from his actions of a Jew who does something which is a dispute whether it is permitted on Shabbat on Shabbat.<Ref>Mishna Brurah 318:2, Leviat Chen n. 43. Rav Ovadia Yosef in Meor Lyisrael Shabbat 38a asks why we're not strict based on the principle that dvar sheyesh lo matirin is forbidden whenever there is a safek derabbanan. He answers that the Pri Chadash 497:3 writes that we're only strict about a doubt and not if there's dispute in the poskim. Also, he cited the Mordechai beitzah ch. 3 that if there's no chazaka of isur we can be lenient about a doubt. Lastly he cited Zayit Ranan 2:5 who said that there's no dvar sheyesh lo matirin for the penalty of maaseh Shabbat which isn't as serious a regular rabbinic prohibition.</ref> | # One may benefit from his actions of a Jew who does something which is a dispute whether it is permitted on Shabbat on Shabbat.<Ref>Mishna Brurah 318:2, Leviat Chen n. 43. Rav Ovadia Yosef in Meor Lyisrael Shabbat 38a asks why we're not strict based on the principle that dvar sheyesh lo matirin is forbidden whenever there is a safek derabbanan. He answers that the Pri Chadash 497:3 writes that we're only strict about a doubt and not if there's dispute in the poskim. Also, he cited the Mordechai beitzah ch. 3 that if there's no chazaka of isur we can be lenient about a doubt. Lastly he cited Zayit Ranan 2:5 who said that there's no dvar sheyesh lo matirin for the penalty of maaseh Shabbat which isn't as serious a regular rabbinic prohibition.</ref> | ||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
==Smell, Sight, or Noise== | ==Smell, Sight, or Noise== | ||
# It is forbidden to benefit from something that was produced on Shabbat as a result of a Jew violating Shabbat even if that only entails smelling, seeing, or listen to that production.<ref>Pesachim 26a clarifies that benefitting from something forbidden including smelling, seeing, or listening. Seeing and listening are only rabbinic, while smelling is considered biblical. The gemara applies this principle only to benefitting from hekdesh, sanctified property. Nonetheless, the rishonim apply it to avoda zara and other prohibitions as well. Yabia Omer 6:34 culls a list of these rishonim: Rabbenu Yerucham 17:5, Isur Vheter 39:33, Ran Nedarim 35b, and Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 142:15.</ref> For example, it is forbidden to listen to the radio to see a internet or television production on Shabbat that Jews produced on Shabbat.<ref>Yabia Omer OC 6:34</ref> There are other issues involved with listening to the radio or watching the internet or television on Shabbat ([[Zilzul Shabbat]]). | # It is forbidden to benefit from something that was produced on Shabbat as a result of a Jew violating Shabbat even if that only entails smelling, seeing, or listen to that production.<ref>Pesachim 26a clarifies that benefitting from something forbidden including smelling, seeing, or listening. Seeing and listening are only rabbinic, while smelling is considered biblical. The gemara applies this principle only to benefitting from hekdesh, sanctified property. Nonetheless, the rishonim apply it to avoda zara and other prohibitions as well. Yabia Omer 6:34 culls a list of these rishonim: Rabbenu Yerucham 17:5, Isur Vheter 39:33, Ran Nedarim 35b, and Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 142:15.</ref> For example, it is forbidden to listen to the radio to see a internet or television production on Shabbat that Jews produced on Shabbat.<ref>Yabia Omer OC 6:34</ref> There are other issues involved with listening to the radio or watching the internet or television on Shabbat ([[Zilzul Shabbat]]). | ||
#Similarly, a recording that was created by a Jew on Shabbat is forbidden from benefit.<Ref>Az Nidbaru 6:18, Mishneh Halachot 7:55</ref> | |||
==Sources== | ==Sources== | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
[[Category:Shabbat]] | [[Category:Shabbat]] | ||
