Q&A: Violating a Rabbinic Prohibition in Order to Avoid Unavoidable Failure Regarding a Torah-Level Obligation
Violating a Rabbinic Prohibition in Order to Avoid Unavoidable Failure Regarding a Torah-Level Obligation
Question
Hello Rabbi,
If a person gets in very late on Friday night and knows that there is a high chance he will not manage to get up in time to recite the Shema within its proper time, is he allowed to set an alarm clock so he can wake up on time (assuming this is the only option available to him)?
Answer
Absolutely not. Assuming that using an alarm clock is a rabbinic prohibition, there is no permission whatsoever to do so. And if he is prevented by circumstances beyond his control and does not get up for the Shema, then he is under duress. And even if he would not be considered under duress, it would still be forbidden to do this. See the Talmudic passage about removing bread from the oven at the beginning of tractate Shabbat (4a), and the commentators and halakhic decisors there. And note that there the discussion is about a prohibition that will be violated because of your actions, not about failing to fulfill a commandment under duress when you could only have saved yourself from it.
Discussion on Answer
Meaning, if he were not under duress, it would be permitted to set an alarm, no?
First, even in the passage about removing bread from the oven, the conclusion is not so simple. Tosafot there writes that they permitted it because they knew he would not listen to them regarding the prohibition anyway, since he would be liable to stoning. Meaning, intrinsically, it is not permitted to violate a rabbinic prohibition in such a situation. And when it comes to neglecting a positive commandment, there is nothing preventing him from observing the rabbinic prohibition and transgressing the Torah-level obligation instead; in that case he will listen to them, since there is no stoning. Beyond that, there the issue is a prohibition and not the neglect of a positive commandment. And beyond that, there it is about saving himself from an act of transgression that he has already done, whereas here it is about avoiding entry into future duress, regarding which it is doubtful whether there is any obligation at all. The medieval authorities (Rishonim) and the halakhic decisors disagreed about this in several places.
Wikipedia says regarding removing bread from the oven that the Talmud concludes that a person is permitted to remove the dough in order to prevent violating a Torah prohibition; that is, the Sages did not uphold their enactments in a case where keeping them would lead a person to a Torah prohibition.