In the wake of the Atlantic article about e-readers and Shabbos (link), I’d like to examine why they cannot be used on Shabbos and how they can be adjusted for such use. All of this assumes that the reading material is appropriate, whether for weekday or for Shabbos (see Shulchan Arukh, Orach Chaim 307:16-17). If not, then you have another reason why you should not be using an e-reader.
I. Electricity
The issue of electricity in halakhah is complex. The clear practice is to forbid adjusting electric currents on Shabbos, although there is a range of opinions as to why. This comes to the fore in the literature regarding hearing aids. Ruling entirely strictly on Shabbos causes extreme hardship to the elderly. The consensus seems to be that unless there are extenuating circumstances, we follow the strict views. When there is a need to rule leniently, we take into account the lenient views (see R. Yosef Eliyahu Henkin, Eidus Le-Yisrael, nos. 20, 56). Unless we are discussing a doctor or soldier using an e-reader for their work, or some similar extenuating circumstance, we cannot permit the electronic use involved in utilizing an e-reader on Shabbos.
II. Writing
The biblical prohibition against writing on Shabbos only applies to ink (or the equivalent) that lasts on a parchment (or the equivalent) that lasts. If you write with fruit juice, which doesn’t last, you only violate a rabbinic prohibition (“last” means either until the end of Shabbos or for the time people normally write things — see Sha’ar Ha-Tziyun 303:68; Bi’ur Halakhah 340 sv. be-mashkin). Similarly, writing on a vegetable is only rabbinically prohibited (Mishnah, Shabbos 104b).
R. Shmuel Wosner (Shevet Ha-Levi 6:37), writing in 1983, ruled that creating letters on a computer screen is biblically prohibited. The screen will not dissolve or rot, and is therefore the equivalent of parchment. The letters, also, will remain on screen permanently unless someone actively removes them. Indeed, in that period before screensavers, it was common to see letter burned into a computer screen, visible even when the screen was turned off. I suspect, but am not certain, that the advent of screensavers, which automatically erase the letters in a few minutes, should change this evaluation.
One might argue that on a computer screen, there is no ink on top of a parchment. The ink and the parchment are, essentially, one and the same (I’ll let the engineers correct me if I am wrong in this simplification). However, that is also true about engraving and photography, both of which are clearly prohibited. R. Moshe Feinstein wrote, in a 1979 responsum to R. Ephraim Greenblatt (Iggeros Moshe, Orach Chaim 4:40:10): “Anything that creates the act of writing, and in any manner that one performs the act of writing, is considered writing because the result of his action is that there are letters he wanted and he made them in the normal way of the act.” Similarly, Dayan Yaakov Posen writes in his Kitzur Hilkhos Shabbos (35:4): “It doesn’t matter with what the writing is made, just that what he writes should be subsequently visible.”
III. Rabbinic Writing
R. Nachum Rabinovich (Melumedei Milchamah, nos. 57, 63) argues that writing on a computer screen is not a prohibited form of writing because neither the letters nor the background will last. You will eventually turn off the electricity causing everything to disappear, and even if you do not the batteries or generator will eventually lose power and turn the computer off. Additionally, writing by typing is like writing with your left hand — it isn’t the normal way to write.
I fail to understand the argument. The screen, even if turned off, remains in place. Only the letters disappear. Therefore, writing on a computer should be rabbinically prohibited. Additionally, the Mishnah Berurah (340:22) writes that even if neither the writing nor the background will last, the writing is still rabbinically prohibited (that seems to me to be the simple understanding of the Yere’im and Semag on this subject).
The electricity argument is difficult at a home or office where the computer is connected to enough electricity to last multiple lifetimes. But even battery-operated screens do not dissolve. They merely turn off and can be turned back on. Only the letters disappear. And regarding performing a forbidden act by pushing buttons, the Chazon Ish (Orach Chaim, 36) established quite convincingly that plowing a field by starting the electricity is equivalent to doing it by hand. By pushing the button, one violates a biblical prohibition. I’m not sure why typing should be any different (see the She’arim Metzuyanim Ba-Halakhah (80:58) who quotes sources prohibiting telegraphs and stenography).
IV. Electronic Writing
Regardless, R. Rabinovich concludes (p. 187) that typing on a computer is rabbinically prohibited because it is similar to writing. He also quotes R. Moshe Feinstein (Techumin, no. 14 p. 432) and R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach as saying that it is at most rabbinically prohibited (see also Shemiras Shabbos Ke-Hilkhasah 66:55 where R. Yehoshua Neuwirth clearly implies that writing on a computer consists of text that does not last on a screen that does; and see Chol Hamoed, p. 91 n. 43; Shulchan Shlomo 340:10-11).
This means that using an e-reader or texting is doubly forbidden rabbinically on Shabbos — because of manipulation of electricity and writing.
V. Uvda De-Chol
There is a vague prohibition of uvda de-chol which forbids “weekday” activities. It cannot prohibit everything we do during the week because then we would not be allowed to eat or talk. R. Dovid Ribiat (The 39 Melochos, vol. 1, Introduction, n. 523) explains the views of three leading authorities of the late twentieth century on what is forbidden as uvda de-chol. According to R. Moshe Feinstein, the act is best performed in a forbiden way and the alternate, less intensive way one performs it on Shabbos is not readily evident. According to R. Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, something that is normally done in a forbidden way. According to R. Yaakov Kamenetsky, something done on a large scale rather than just for Shabbos. Because using a computer is forbidden, using an e-reader in a uniquely permitted way (see below) might be an uvda de-chol according to R. Auerbach. I don’t think R. Feinstein or R. Kamenetsky would consider it an uvda de-chol.
VI. A Shabbos E-Reader
What follows are initial thoughts on how to devise an e-reader that can be used on Shabbos. I leave it to leading rabbis to fully and conclusively evaluate any proposal. An e-reader cannot be adjusted on Shabbos but it can be programmed to start a book at a certain time and turn the page at specific intervals (e.g. every 30 seconds). You can schedule a book for, say, 3pm on Shabbos afternoon.
All buttons would have to be automatically disabled so a reader cannot accidentally (or intentionally) adjust the reader. If you miss a page, it’s like going to the bathroom during a TV show (back, before DVRs) — you missed it. Additionally, the e-reader would have to glow on the outside or change colors so that anyone looking will know that it is operating in Shabbos mode.
Would anyone want this when they can buy or borrow a hard copy book? Right now, I can’t see why. But if and when a generation arises that only knows e-books, its members might want one. Until then, we’ll stick with traditional books for Shabbos.
>Don’t you think there were shaylos when flushable toilets first appeared? I guarantee you there were. For whatever reason our Sages permitted it, probably because it’s not electric, it’s permitted. If it was electrically operated you can be sure it would be forbidden on Shabbos as well.
How can you guarantee that? Would a family of 8 be required to allow their waste to sit for 24 hours? Maybe, but it’s no simple matter to require that. Bedavka because electricity is not so poshut is why you certainly can’t be sure that it would be forbidden.
Here’s the thing, from a pragmatic perspective. Some things are done simply because they have always been done, whether right or wrong, and all the reason and rationale in the world won’t change it.
Even if it comes out that it is permitted to use aneBook on Shabbos, or even to turn on lights for that matter, it is pretty much a given that if you invite another frum couple over for lunch on Shabbos, and they see you flip the switch on or off, it’s virtually guaranteed that they won’t be showing up again for anything to eat, and your entire frumkeit will be called into question, with all the disadvantages that come with it.
Just like when it was “announced” that eggs don’t need to be checked any longer, and it’s even ok to eat it with a blood spot. Possibly so, but I am pretty confident that most, if not all, frum woen are still checking every egg they use, and tossing out those with a spot, and if they didn’t, the same consequences would result if anyone knew.
So basically, this is all academic.
you don’t sit in your waste. there are various methods used to control odors.
i am reminded of my father telling me his cousins were considered “rich” in hungary — they had their own private outhouse. didn’t have to share it with a neighbor, like everybody else.
(now that’s an excessive imposition. sharing.)
>Even if it comes out that it is permitted to use aneBook on Shabbos, or even to turn on lights for that matter, it is pretty much a given that if you invite another frum couple over for lunch on Shabbos, and they see you flip the switch on or off, it’s virtually guaranteed that they won’t be showing up again for anything to eat, and your entire frumkeit will be called into question, with all the disadvantages that come with it.
In this very thread I said that it would probably be impossible to roll back, so in this I agree with you.
However, on the other hand many things which used to be considered unthinkable and klohr ossur are not routine and considered obviously muttar. For example, we are all communicating in English using the Latin alphabet. Grape juice used to be she-hakol. Unthinkable to make kiddush on grape juice. And yet?
>you don’t sit in your waste.
You also don’t leave a half dozen people’s waste in a toilet for 24 hours.
>there are various methods used to control odors.
Like flushing the toilet, for example.
so many things assur, passul, tameh, treif, who can keep up with the sheer sacred beauty of it all?
Anonymous wrote:
“You are making up things out of thin air. That is not how halachah operates. There are categories and rules. You can’t just invent new notions. Nobody is addicted, we use refrigerators and air conditioners because they are good for everyone. Should we stop using them on shabbos to refrain from demonstrating something you just dreamed up?”
I think that your response illustrates a mistaken premise-namely, that we can bend Hilcos Shabbos at will without considering the halachic and hashkafic premises underlying the same.I do not view the definitions of Melacha, Gzeros and Muktzeh or such concepts as Meleches Machsheves, Melacha SheTricah LGufa, Gzeros or Muktzeh as categories imposed, but rather as the framework of Hilcos Shabbos and the basis for understanding that Shabbos is a day when as HaShem in Maaseh Breishis ceased all creative endeavors, so should we. Viewing the same in the above posted dismissive POV is IMO illustrative of a lack of knowledge of the halachic and hashkafic underpinnings of Shabbos Kodesh.
Speficially, I think that when RMF wrote a teshuvah forbidding the use of Shabbos clocks for air conditioners, air conditioning was nowhere as commonly used and relied upon as it is today. Thus, the question of whether using a clock for the same as not in the spirit of Shabbos would require a different Psak. Use of refrigerators can easily be justified by using the rationale of the Aruch in defining a Psik Reshe De Lo Nicha Leh. Flushing a toilet IMO seems analogous to removing the garbage or an infant’s diaper in any area enclosed by an eruv simply because it is a Graf Shel Reai. In a similar manner, see RSZA’s corrrespondence with the CI and comments quoted on the RCA blog re hearing aides. The real issue is the accomodation of technology within the halachic realms and hashkafic purposes of Shabbos, as opposed to deeming any innovation as inherently prohibited or permitted until and unless proven otherwise.
I am surprised that noone yet in this discussion has raised the issue of whether using technology in a non Pikuach Nefesh context constitutes a violation of “Shabason” as defined by the Ramban (Vayikra,23:24), Ritva and other Rishonim. I seem to recall that Rambam ( but I don’t exactly where) requires a Shevisah HaNikeres-how anyone can claim that active use of technology that demonstrates one’s technological mastery is in consonance with a proper appreciation of the Halachic and Hashkafic underpinnings of Shabbos strikes me as very similar to the specious arguments presented in favor of driving on Shabbos, openning JCCs , gyms and museums on Shabbos and permitting athletic activities by adults-none of which have led anyone to a true appreciation of the purpose of Shemiras Shabbos-recognition that man ceases from creative activity as well as any activity that is similar to the same or would leave to creative activity. Arguments about the permissibility of air conditioning, flushing the toilet, etc strike me as specious.
FWIW,the Atlantic article included a quote from a YCT trained rabbi that we must embrace technology and that he thinks that the prohibition against electricity on Shabbos will be revisited.
I think that the proper approach, as in all cases involving technology and science, is how technological advances can be reconciled with the existing halachic structure of Hilcos Shabbos.
In the comments to the Atlantic article, there was a link to an article by R Broyde and R Jachter in which they concluded, based on the reasoning of RSZA and other Poskim, that the use of electricity, was rabbinically forbidden. The notion that a rabbinical prohibition can be easily revisited and simply uprooted flies in the face of the well known words of the Kesef Mishnah in Hilcos Mamrim that it is far more difficult to revisit and uproot a rabbinical prohibition than a Torah prohibition. It also is contrary to the fact that all of Hilcos Shabbos, whether a Melacha Min HaTorah, Melacha MiDrabbanan, Gzerah and related halachos such as Muktzeh and Shabboson are designed to remind us that we are to avoid not just creative activity, but even activity that resembles creative activity and that would reduce the Kedusha of Shabbos Kodesh. For the same reason, I think that we should avoid the tendency to place Sefarim on E-readers and the like.
I previously commented on R J Fox’s comments re the possible reevaluation of the rabbinic nature of the prohibition against using electricity in the absence of a timer or not in a life threatening circumstance. I may have overstated my point, but to even raise the white flag and view a rabbinical prohibition of warranting the same merely because of technological advancements strikes me as approaching the issue of adjusting the Torah and Halacha to the times, as opposed to evaluating technological issues from the prism of Mesorah and TSBP.
Steve B. So tachlis, when you’re in a hotel over Shabbat, do you stay in the room all of Shabbat because the lock and/or room environmental sensors are electronic — as they increasingly are?
You tape the lock before Shabbos. The rest depends on specifics but is probably pesik reisha delo nicha leih on a derabbanan.
IIRC, we also may have taped the lock in addition to acting that the lock be disconnected.
[...] someone asks, no you cannot use an iPad on Shabbos: link) Share and [...]
The truth is that electricity IS permitted on Shabbos. If you live in a tall building and you turn on the tap or flush the toilet, you necessarily operate a pump. It is NOT indirect. It is automatic, a “Psik Reshei de Nichah lei”, although unseen. Yet no-one forbids this.
The principle seems to be that it is a major necessity AND it is unseen.
Geoff M, neither of the actions you mentioned require the use of electricity. Tap water and service water in a high rise building flows by gravity from a day tank on the roof. In NYC, the day tank is filled by main pressure alone in buildings less than 20 storeys high. In taller buildings, an electric pump operated by a level switch in the day tank assists main pressure in filling the tank. Even in such a case opening the tap or flushing the water does not directly involve the use of electricity. Waste water also flows by gravity to the sewer mains whose pumps operate autonimously by level and pressure switchs and transmitters.