Shabbat part 16

Anyone who studies the laws of Shabbat is usually mystified by the complexity of everything involved with cooking. But what is complex is not actually the halachah, but the numerous svarot (theoretical constructs) of some later rabbis, as well as the difficulty of comparing modern cooking methods and their halachic status with ancient ones. Rule number one is the clear statement in all classical sources "Ein Biushul Ahar Bishul" (there is no such thing as cooking after cooking); that is, once an item is fully cooked, further cooking is of no halachic significance in terms of Shabbat. Most Yemenites go by this rule even today, with Sepharadim following not far behind. If an item was cooked prior to Shabbat, there is no problem to stick it in the fridge, and heat it up on Shabbat. If something was only partially cooked, that's where the problems come in. It may cook further. If stirred, an uncooked part may be moved closer to the heat, and become cooked faster. Aside from the above rule of "Ein Bishul...", there are a number of rabbinic considerations. Most stoves in Talmudic times were simply boxes with fuel (charcoal, twigs, etc.), with a hole for the pot to sit in. When keeping food warm, there was concern that we are actually cooking it, or appear to do so (Meihazi K'mevashel). Therefore, most of the fuel needed to be removed, with some ashes spread over the remaining coals to show we are only keeping the food warm. I don't know about your stove, but mine doesn't work that way. In more recent centuries, this was replaced by putting a piece of sheet metal (known in Yiddish as a "blech") over the flame, with the pots sitting on the metal. In the case of the oven, it is kept at a lower than normal temperature, usually with the oven door kept slightly ajar, in order to indicate that food is merely being kept warm. (Ovens made in Israel have a special Shabbat setting). One may also use an electric hot plate (according to most). This can be kept on a timer, heating up just before the food needs to be warmed. Sepharadic Jews are only one step stricter than the Yemenites. There is a significant minority of rabbinic opinions that the rule of "ein bishul..." applies only to solids, and not liquids. One could easily tell if a steak had been cooked or not. A pot of boiling water that has been cooled would be difficult to distinguish from freshwater (although it may taste flat). Therefore, Sepharadim will cook before Shabbat anything other than liquids. An electric urn can be left on for tea or coffee, or else water may be heated on Shabbat on an overturned pan, on the blech or hot plate, so that it will not get to the level of cooking. Many, but not all, Sepharadic poskim permit heating up previously cooked dishes, so long as the majority is solid.(This is my practice). So your roast beef need not be a dried-out brick. Heating in its own (previously cooked) gravy is fine, as long as the majority is solid. All this is for Sepharadim (although many Modern Orthodox have adopted these as well). Ashkenazim have much more complex procedures, to be discussed in my next post. But why? What are the concerns? First of all, how can you be certain that any given dish is fully cooked? Besides, what do you mean by "cooked"? Like in English, the Hebrew word has two meanings. It can include fried, roasted, broiled, as well as boiled. Or, it can mean only "boiled". So, does "Ein Bishul.."" mean only boiled foods, or all cooking methods?. Can I warm up on the blech (essentially broiling) a fully cooked boiled chicken? A Sepharadi would laugh at the question. The Ashkenazi would respond "What's your proof?" Beyond that, what do we mean by "dry"? Everything has some "juices" in it. Perhaps the "Ein bishul..." rule was only meant to be theoretical. Ashkenazim can also bring up the fact that RAMBAM interprets the "Ein Bishul.." rule to mean BIBLICALLY FORBIDDEN cooking, but still a rabbinic prohibition.Also, since our stoves and ovens are adjustable, the knobs must be removed or taped into place, so as not to transgress the laws of adding fuel to a fire, or partaking in a cooking procedure.(Sepharadim dismiss this out of hand, as we have no power to make new rabbinic enactments.) So as not to transgress rabbinic law, a number of procedures must be undertaken, essentially requiring the food to stay on the blech all of Shabbat, with brief exceptions to serve the food, carefully observing a protocol that I shall describe next time. Now, Sepharadim generally follow RAMBAM, with classical Yemenite practice even more closely following RAMBAM. But here, most Sepharadic and Yemenites have rejected his position as excessive, and contrary to older sources. Rabbi Yosef Kappah, a great Yemenite sage (whom I was privileged to know), wrote that the practice of putting cold food to be warmed was used in Yemen way before RAMBAM. Since heating food on Shabbat follows nearly all rabbinic opinions, it is justified to leave the practice in place, for liquids as well as solids. Ashkenazim have great difficulty with that approach. Details to come.

Shabbat part 15

We are now off to shul. Orthodox services are very similar in structure between one group and another. They consist of morning blessings, thanking G-d for the fundamentals of life (ability to see, move about, etc.) In some communities, these are said shortly after rising, rather than at synagogue.In many communities, Biblical and Talmudic passages about the sacrifices are read, as our prayers replace, to some extent, the mandated sacrifices. These are followed by a section of Psalms and other inspirational readings. Then comes Shema with it's blessings (in all but a few communities the blessings are enlarged a bit from their weekday form). Then comes the amidah; very different from its weekday counterpart. Although it begins with Praise and concludes with Thanks, the middle section omits requests, and asks that we may appreciate both the Shabbat and the Torah. Moses' joy at having received the Torah, especially the commands of Shabbat, is emphasized The gentle, feminine themes of Friday night are gone. The mood is active and celebratory. The two will coalesce later at the afternoon service. The Torah is read, followed by a prophetic portion of a similar theme to that week's Torah portion. Legend has it that the prophetic portion came in at a time of persecution, during which the Torah was not allowed to be read, but they had no objection to the reading of the prophets. There doesn't seem to be a historical basis for this legend. Rather, the rabbis wanted to show the idea of the continuity of the revelation of G-d from Moses, into the prophets. The Samaritans didn't accept the prophets, so this may be a reason for the additional reading. It may also have been instituted against the Christians, who believed that the prophets had been "fulfilled". The prophetic reading may have been instituted to show that we yet await the fulfillment of the prophecies. The blessings after the prophetic reading seem to bolster the latter explanation. In most congregations, the rabbi then gives a sermon. This was not a traditional practice, and was probably adopted from non-Jewish sources. Historically, the rabbi would speak only on special occasions; especially the Shabbat before Passover, and the Shabbat between Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur. In more learned communities, the original custom is still kept. But less learned communities appreciate the inspiration and guidance of a rabbi. Following this is another amidah for "Musaf" (the additional service), corresponding to the additional sacrifice offered in the Temple on Shabbat and other special occasions. The theme of the middle section is reflection on what we no longer have, and want back with the return to Zion and the building of the third Temple. In Conservative synagogues, this is replaced by a section that deals with historical memories of the Temple, without reference to a restoration. Some hymns are then recited, and the service is over. Although the structure is roughly the same everywhere, there are huge differences in melodies and style, as well as the degree of seriousness with which the prayers are recited. I have been at Shabbat morning services that lasted from one to four hours, with two and a half being the average. I have been at some that were recited in a perfunctory manner, I have been at services that were more like a social event; with conversations all but drowning out the prayers and Torah reading. But I have also been at "Yeshivish" services, where the worshipers can be seen struggling with the meanings and implications of the prayers, and attempting to internalize them. I have been at Hasidic services that were recited in a celebratory mood, often with a great deal of singing. I once attended a very long Hasidic service in which virtually every line was sung with a different tune. In Sepharadic and Yemenite communities nearly the entire service is recited aloud, which essentially eliminates the chatter heard all too often among Ashkenazim. Conservative services are along the same lines, albeit considerably shortened, with references to a return to sacrifices carefully censored out. Classical Reform was more like a Protestant service, but now has come back to a much more traditional structure. They come out with a new prayer book roughly every decade. Each one is closer and closer to the traditional service. Following the services, there is usually a kiddush; the sanctification over wine (or, in some cases, hard liquor) is recited, followed by cake and other refreshments. This is also the time for socializing. We head for home. But wait. We want to have a beautiful Shabbat meal. The second Shabbat meal is traditionally the most lavish. But how are we to eat such a meal, when cooking is not permitted on Shabbat? Are we to eat cold? Definitely not! How food is prepared and served on Shabbat differs greatly between communities, as does the menu. That will be the next part of the story.

Shabbat part 14

What happens when we turn on the hot water in the sink or bathtub? Water that has been automatically heated in the boiler comes out from the faucet. Usually, we have it mixed with cold water, in order to arrive at the desired temperature. Might we be "cooking" the cold water? We are certainly making it warmer than it was! A sensor in the boiler "notices" a drop in water pressure, so more water is brought in to the boiler to be heated. Are we "cooking" the cold water? When the temperature in the boiler falls below a certain point, a fire goes on that heats the water. Am I guilty of lighting a fire on Shabbat? The answer to all of these questions is "no!". When the hot and cold waters mix, the resulting mixture is not likely to be "yad soledet" ("the hand recoils"; actually a temperature high enough to cause scalding.) Yes, there are a few poskim who ruled that even heating something by a single degree, is "cooking". As this view is sourceless, most ignore it. Anyway, even if it were, it has not been heated directly, which constitutes "Grama" (causation), which for Ashkenazim is permissible in an emergency, for Sepharadim for any necessity. But the view that this is in any way a form of cooking is both a minority view, as well as without logic. In fact, those who came up with that view, mixed up the laws of cooking and of annealing metal, in which metal is heated before plunging into cold water in order to harden it. ANY heating is forbidden in such a case. The cold water entering the boiler happens automatically, after a delay of several seconds. It, too, is Grama. The fire going on when the water gets cold (because of my taking out hot water, with cold water going in, is "eino mitkaven"; the situation where something I do may or may not result in a forbidden action. This is permissible in the first instance. In the final analysis, Ashkenazim would be loathe to permit such a perilous combination of "Maybes" However, many would permit it if needed for medical reasons, or for cases of great discomfort. Most Sepharadim would permit it. Some add in an additional factor. Although "yad soledet" has different estimates, we know that scalding occurs between 130 degrees F, and 140 degrees F. (54 C to 60C). If the home boiler is set for under that. no "cooking" takes place whatsoever, and is totally a non-issue! Most home boilers are set lower than that anyway. But why should we "scrape the sidewalls" like this? How about being clean in honor of Shabbat, as well as for personal comfort? In Rav Yitzcak Abadi's website, someone asked "can I shower on Shabbat? The answer was "Please do!" A more recent complication is the situation of "instant" water heaters, that switch on whenever the hot water knob is activated, and heat the water on the spot. Although this is clearly also a Grama, it is, for all rabbis I know of "too close for comfort". I would only use this on Shabbat in case of an emergency. My landlord is planning to switch to this system shortly, so I am in the process of researching the issue.
We are almost ready to go to synagogue for morning services. Some, especially Hasidim, will take a dip in the Mikveh for added spiritual purity. Although a Sepharadic service will generally be early (8 am is fairly standard, but many pray earlier; reciting shema' just before sunrise, and amidah just after). Ashkenazim generally pray later on Shabbat (9 is typical, but many go later. Chabad start at 10 or 10:30. Many go later than that. This does NOT apply to Breslov!). Although eating before prayer is technically forbidden (except for the sick), most Ashkenazim have a snack before synagogue, so as not to be disturbed in their prayers by hunger. Chabad has a saying "Better to eat in order to pray than to pray in order to eat". Anyway, RAMBAM rules that one may not pray if one is hungry. Hasidim will typically study some inspirational literature before beginning prayers. Many Sepharadim will meet their Ashkenazi friends as the former are on their way home, and the latter are on their way to synagogue. In my next post, I will discuss the Shabbat morning prayers.

Shabbat part 13

There are many "outs" in the laws of Shabbat. They need to be examined based on sources, as well as judged for their advisability in "real life". First allow me to reiterate a basic principle in regard to "emergency" situations. When danger to life "pikuah nefesh" is involved, all Shabbat restrictions go by the wayside, although we may not do anything that is unnecessary for the patient. Even if an action is necessary, we try to minimize the work done; like preferring a rabbinic prohibition over a Biblical one, if this would not mean a delay in the patient's care. In case of general weakness or discomfort (pain all over the body, or pain so severe that the patient needs to lie down, or cannot sleep), albeit not in actual danger, rabbinic prohibitions may be ignored. Let's take a look at these principles and their application. You will recall that the thirty-nine categories of "work" on Shabbat, are derived from the labors used in the building of the Sanctuary. But what if we are performing the same labor, but not for the same goal for which it was used in the Sanctuary? This is known as "einah tzerichah l'gufah" (not needed for itself). According to most authorities, such an act constitutes only a rabbinic prohibition. An example would be  "Extinguishing". In the Sanctuary, wood would be partially burned and then extinguished, in order to make charcoal. What if we are extinguishing a candle, in order to enable a sick person to sleep? Although "extinguishing" is a Biblical prohibition, the action of blowing out the candle would, according to most, be a rabbinic prohibition (since one is not intending to make charcoal), and hence be permissible in the case of a person ill, but not dangerously so. The next "out" is "Grama" (causation). For example, watering plants is a Biblical prohibition. I am standing in my driveway, washing my hands over the asphalt. The water will soon run onto my lawn. I am CAUSING the lawn to be watered, although not doing so directly. This is permissible in case of necessity. Ashkenazi rabbis will require a situation of great necessity. Most Sepharadi rabbis will allow this action even in a case of some necessity, as long as it is not frivolous (as in "the grass looks dry; I think I'll water it through a Grama). In the case where I am having a picnic on my lawn, and walking into the house would be inconvenient, a Sepharadi would wash his hands over pavement, ignoring the eventual runoff onto the lawn. An Ashkenazi would ask "where's the emergency?" Another situation is called "Psik Reisheih" (Aramaic for "cutting off his head") Killing an animal normally used for food is a Biblical prohibition on Shabbat. (Other animals would be rabbinic). In the days before computer games, our ancestors would often entertain their children with animal parts, especially chicken heads. If one cuts off the head of a chicken, it will die. If one cuts off the head, has one violated the prohibition of killing on Shabbat? The answer is that this depends on one's motive. If he wanted the dead chicken, so as to feed it to his dogs, although the killing of the chicken was not his prime motive, it is nevertheless a Biblical prohibition. Using a knife is not prohibited, but my cutting of the chicken's neck, and its subsequent death, are the immediate and inevitable outcome of my action. On the other hand, if I did not want the chicken to die, and I merely wanted the child to stop crying, my action is prohibited by rabbinic law, and according to some, is actually permissible. Hence, any essentially permitted action, which will inevitably result in a prohibited act, is a pesik reisheih. If I want the resultant prohibited act, it is called "neiha leih" (he is pleased), and the initial act actually is a full Biblical prohibition. If I didn't want the resultant situation (lo neiha leih), the action is only rabbinically prohibited, and perhaps permissible. In a case where the prohibited act may or may not take place, it is permitted in the first instance. For example, it is prohibited to cut one's grass on Shabbat. But walking through the lawn, although some grass may be uprooted, is totally permissible. (Please ignore a statement to the contrary in the "Abridged Shulchan Aruch"). Finally, if a prohibited act is performed in an unusual manner (e.g., with one's elbow instead of one's hand), a Biblical prohibition becomes rabbinic, while a rabbinic prohibition becomes permissible, at least in cases of necessity. In fact, there is a highly respected agency in Israel called "Machon Tzomet". They produce appliances and other objects for use on Shabbat, primarily for security and law enforcement, that operate on one of the above principles. (a technically permissible pen, a telephone, a coffee maker, and much more). On the other hand, if I were to produce a permissible cell phone, a television, a car, what would be left of Shabbat? Imagine a family sitting around the Shabbat table; one is listening to Hip Hop, two are following the news, three are texting their friends. This would, in most cases, be a situation called in the Talmud "Despicable within the bounds of Torah". Like in the case of the JCC I mentioned in my last post, I could be right, and yet be so terribly wrong! But emergencies do happen, and need to be distinguished from everyday situations. I'll end with an actual story. A religious soldier in the Israeli air force had the responsibility of going through a checklist with the pilot, ensuring that the plane was in proper working order. He was supposed to write down each item that had been checked. He didn't want to write on Shabbat, so he relied on his memory. He missed one point. The plane crashed, killing the pilot. Next time, I'll return to the shower.