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 have learned multiple ideas related to the concept of grama, and today we are going to try to tie them together.
Most rishonim and poskim understand in accordance with Rabbeinu Chananel, that the concept of meleches machsheves takes an action which elsewhere would be considered grama and makes it chayav. This concept is specific to chiyuv Shabbos. However, there are four limitations to this chiyuv:
- The process must start immediately following the action, without a time lapse. If there is a time lapse, it is considered a grama (based on the definition of the Zera Emes).
- The action is only considered meleches machsheves if the person is trying to do the action (based on the definition of the Even Haozer)
- The action is only considered meleches machsheves if the person wants the action to happen (based on the definition of the Avnei Nezer)
- This is the normal way for performing this action (based on the definition of the Achiezer).
We have learned multiple cases where one will be chayav for the action on Shabbos, even though a similar action would not generate a chiyuv in other realms of halacha (e.g., damages).
There seems to be a Gemara which says the opposite. The Gemara in Bava Kamma introduces a case of Reuvain taking Shimon’s animal and bringing it to stand next to Levi’s pile of grain. Shimon’s animal eats from the pile of grain. Reuvain will argue that he did not damage the grain but rather the animal damaged the grain. We know that a person is chayav when his animal or other object damages, but over here, it is not Reuvain’s animal. Nevertheless, the Gemara says he is chayav.
There is a machlokes rishonim regarding which of the avos nezikin creates the chiyuv. Tosfos says that this is a form of shein, an animal which damages through eating. The chiddush of this Gemara is that Reuvain is chayav even though it is not his animal. However, the nezek of shein is only chayav in a reshus hayachid. In a reshus harabbim, the owner is patur. If so, if this takes place in a reshus harabbim, Reuvain is patur.
The Rashba explains that an animal is an “eating machine”. Bringing the animal to food is essentially using the koach of the animal for the person to themselves to eat. If so, the chiyuv is adam hamazik, which is chayav in reshus harabbim as well.
Thus, we seem to have a Gemara which, according to the Rashba, teaches us that when a person brings an animal to eat something, they are causing it to happen and therefore chayav.
The question is that the Gemara in Shabbos says that a person’s animal cannot do work on Shabbos (as the pasuk teaches us explicitly). If so, the same way a person cannot perform one of the 39 melachos on Shabbos, their animal cannot perform melacha either. The Gemara asks that if so, one should be forced to keep their animal locked up all Shabbos, and the Gemara answers that the animal can be taken out to pasture on its own, and it can eat on its own. If so, we seem to be saying that placing an animal in a pasture, where inevitably it will eat, is muttar on Shabbos and not considered the person’s action, but when one places an animal next to a pile of someone else’s grain, it is considered damage and they are chayav. If so, we need to understand the difference between the Gemara in Shabbos and the Gemara in Bava Kamma. We will explain the difference in the upcoming shiur, be’ezras Hashem.
Summary
The concept of meleches machsheves can take an action which would otherwise be considered grama and make it chayav. However, there are four caveats:
- The process begins immediately following the action;
- The person is trying to do the action;
- The person wants the action;
- It is the normal method of performing the action.
If any of these caveats are missing, the action reverts to grama.
