Q&A: A Secular Person’s Sabbath-Act
A Secular Person’s Sabbath-Act
Question
Hello Rabbi,
I wanted to ask about a case where someone is staying with a secular family on the Sabbath. Sometimes one of the family members turns on the television on the Sabbath. Is it permissible to watch it in such a case? My initial thought is that this is indeed a Sabbath-act, but the person who did it is considered inadvertent, and therefore benefiting from it is forbidden only to the one who performed the act. In addition, the act was not done for me, but for the person who turned it on.
Also, what would the ruling be regarding watching a program in which Jews appear in a live broadcast (say, a Friday-night studio program), where unlike the previous case the act is done for the potential viewers (that is, among others, also for me if I watch the program).
Answer
According to most opinions, an act done inadvertently is forbidden until after the Sabbath even to others as well (Orach Chayim 318:1). However, here perhaps there is no concrete object that was produced by the act (the turned-on television is not an object but a state of the object), and some have permitted in such a case (I think the Chayei Adam makes this dependent on whether there is a concrete object involved). Still, the Mishnah Berurah tends to be lenient regarding an act that is forbidden only rabbinically, allowing others to benefit from it on that same day.
As best I recall, with a Sabbath-act done by a Jew they did not distinguish whether it was done for me or not. But the categorical imperative certainly forbids it, since if everyone refrained from watching, they would stop doing it.
Discussion on Answer
1. A secular person’s Sabbath-act, if he does not believe in the giving of the Torah, is under compulsion, or at most inadvertent (less than someone who says, “it is permitted”).
2. That is permitted, but if it creates public notice — that is, it makes noise audible outside when people do not know it was left on in advance — then it is rabbinically forbidden.
3. No. I explained this in detail in my article about causing a secular person to sin. Regarding Chabad people putting tefillin on passersby in the streets, there is a very interesting dispute between Rabbi Yitzchak Hutner, who represents my view, and the Rebbe of Chabad of blessed memory. I can’t find it online (I once saw it), and I’d be happy if someone found it and posted it here.
1. Is there a halakhic difference between a Sabbath-act done under compulsion and a Sabbath-act done inadvertently?
3. If there is no value in that, then seemingly the categorical-imperative argument falls away, since we are talking about secular people who produce and broadcast these programs. The link to the exchange between Rabbi Yitzchak Hutner and the Rebbe of Chabad appears here:
On page 88 and onward.
Thank you.
1. The halakhic decisors disagreed about this (see Torat HaMelakhot, vol. 2, siman 247). Simply speaking, in a case of compulsion they did not impose the penalty.
3. Indeed, correct.
According to what you say here, would it be permissible to tell a secular person to do labor for you on the Sabbath? (By hinting or even not by hinting.)
No. Because if you tell him, it is considered as though you yourself did it. Like directly feeding a minor something forbidden, which is prohibited even though the minor’s acts are not themselves transgressions; see Yevamot 113a. And they said the same even regarding causing an adult to do it (when the adult is inadvertent; see Maimonides at the end of the laws of Kilayim, and parallels in the laws of Nazir and the laws of impurity from a corpse, which are noted in the Frankel edition and in the commentaries there).
What if I tell a secular person before the Sabbath, at 2 in the afternoon, “tomorrow” (which is the Sabbath) “turn on the television”?
What is the difference between a secular person who believes in God and a secular atheist, regarding your answer no. 3 to Oren’s question above?
If there are mixed types of secular people involved, then in such a doubtful case what would your answer no. 3 be?
And regarding the value of Sabbath observance for a secular person — why is there no value, Rabbi? After all, if one is liable for violating a prohibition, then by law he should receive reward for observing it. And why not say that from acting not for its own sake one comes to act for its own sake?
If the TV is left on without sound (with subtitles), is there still a concern of public notice?
Suppose there is sound and we write on the door that in this house the TV was left on, and/or the radio was left on — is there any problem with that?
Rabbi, how can television be permitted — isn’t that “pursuing your own affairs”? It’s not sacred matters. Why is it permitted? It sounds a bit like muktzeh.
Telling a non-Jew to do something is different, since some prohibited it under the stringency of agency (Rashi at the beginning of the chapter “Mi Shehechshikh”).
Regarding the actions of a secular person, see my article here:
Television is no different from ordinary weekday talk, or reading a regular book. It is permitted to engage in ordinary non-sacred matters on the Sabbath.
A few related questions:
1. Is it really correct to say that a secular person’s Sabbath-act is considered an act done inadvertently?
2. Would it be permissible from the outset to leave a radio or television on before the Sabbath on non-Jewish channels, or on recorded Israeli programs that do not involve Sabbath desecration?
3. In your opinion, is there any value to Sabbath observance by a secular person (or to a secular person’s refraining from Sabbath desecration) when he has no general intention at all that the observance / refraining is being done because God commanded it.