Sponsorships for the upcoming Klalim, which discuss the 39 melachos of Shabbos, are available. Please contact Rabbi Reingold for more information at rabbireingold@gmail.com or 301.996.5910
We have finished Klal 9. The purpose of this Klal was to learn about broad klalim which come up regarding melachos of Shabbos. We will discuss a few other concepts not discussed by the Chayei Adam. We have discussed the concept of intent impacting the status of melacha, and now we are discussing grama.
We are learning about the concept of grama. We are getting more involved in the sugya than we normally do, because of the challenging nature of the concept. We last learned that the Gemara in Bava Kamma introduces the concept of meleches machsheves considering something which seems to be a grama (zoreh through the wind) to be a direct action and chayav. On the other hand, we learned a Gemara in Shabbos which says grama is patur (extinguishing a fire), and another Gemara in Shabbos which seems to say it is assur (opening the door). We learned that one approach to this question is that the Gemara that says chayav is referring to a direct action, while the Gemara which says patur is referring to an indirect action, and zoreh is unique.
Rabbeinu Chananel gives a different answer. He understands that the Gemara in Shabbos about opening the door and increasing the fire is assur because the act of opening the door is meleches machsheves, as we see from the concept of zoreh. If so, he is understanding that the fact that meleches machsheves creates a chiyuv for zoreh is not unique to the melacha of zoreh, and can be applied to other melachos (see s319). Even though opening the door does not meet the definition of maaseh as defined throughout the rest of Shas, the chiddush of meleches machsheves makes the case chayav. This now creates a need for the Rabbeinu Chananel to explain the Gemara which says that grama is patur (in the case of putting out a fire).
Rabbeinu Chananel explains that in the case of opening the door and fanning the flames, one is chayav even if the wind which fanned the flames was not their koach rishon, a direct result of their action of opening the door. When it comes to chiyuv Shabbos, one will be chayav even for a koach sheini, a later result of their action. Shabbos is different from nezikin (the case in Sanhedrin about opening the dam), because when it comes to nezikin, one is only chayav for their koach rishon and not for their koach sheini. This is all because of meleches machsheves similar to zoreh.
Rabbeinu Chananel does not explain how the Gemaras are not a contradiction to each other. The achronim suggest a few approaches, all of which are accepted in halacha:
- The Zera Emes differentiates between cases where there is a time lapse and where the process starts immediately, even though it extends over a long period of time. In the case of putting out a fire, when one places the hides or jugs around the fire, the fire eventually will reach them, but there is a time lapse between the input of the person and the action. Therefore, that case is considered grama and is muttar.
However, in the case of opening the door and fanning the fire, the airflow is immediate. Even if it is only the koach sheini which actually increases the fire, it is still part of the action of the person. Therefore, one is chayav. This case is analogous to the melacha of bishul. It takes time for something to cook, yet the person’s original maaseh–placing the pot on the fire–is considered as extending through the cooking process.
Even though we do not apply this thought process to other cases throughout halacha, the concept of meleches machsheves allows for this type of case to be considered a person’s direct maaseh. Nevertheless, meleches machsheves will not apply when there is a time lapse between a person’s direct maaseh and the reaction, such as in the case of putting out the fire.
Summary
- We have a contradiction between three Gemaras, two (zoreh and opening the door) which seem to teach that grama is chayav, and one (putting out a fire) which seems to teach that grama is muttar.
- One approach is that
- zoreh is unique,
- and the Gemara about opening the door which says assur is referring to maaseh/koach rishon, direct action. Since the direct action of the person caused the melacha, it is no longer considered a grama and therefore chayav.
- The case of placing items in front of the fire to extinguish it is an indirect action and therefore considered grama.
- Another explanation is that
- zoreh is not unique and the gemara about opening the door is a case of indirect action, which is only chayav because of meleches machsheves
- and the Gemaras which say assur are referring to where there is no time lapse between the person’s action and the beginning of the melacha. Then meleches machsheves works to be mechayav him. When there is no time lapse, one will be chayav even if it is not their koach rishon which causes the melacha.
- The case of placing items in front of the fire to extinguish it is where there is a time lapse between the placement of the item and the extinguishing, and therefore it is considered grama.
