Kedoshim | “You Shall Keep My Sabbaths and Revere My Sanctuary”

Summarized by Aviad Brestel
Translated by David Strauss
 

Introduction

A former student of mine who currently serves as a community rabbi passed on to me a question he had received from the father of a soldier who had an important meeting on his base on Friday afternoon: Is the son permitted to come home for Shabbat after that meeting if coming home involves Shabbat desecration?

My student was inclined to respond with a positive answer, following the Gemara in Eruvin (45a, in the wake of the mishna on 44b), which states that "all who go out to save life may return to their original places," and the responsum of Rabbi Moshe Feinstein based on it (Orach Chayim IV, no. 80), which permits returning home even at the cost of violating a Biblical prohibition, in consideration of the many doctors and nurses who rely on that responsum in Israel and abroad. 

To his disappointment, I replied that in my opinion, the answer is no. First of all, it is clear that the case in question is completely different from that of "all who go out to save life." In addition, it is difficult to rely on Rabbi Moshe Feinstein on this issue, because the Talmudic passage seems to imply that what is stated there applies only to Rabbinic prohibitions, as Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach explains at length in a long responsum in Minchat Shlomo (I, no. 8).

The story does not end there. Two hours later, he called me again, and asked as follows: Can the soldier son travel until the time that Shabbat begins according to Rabbeinu Tam? Instead of giving him a long and detailed answer, I simply said no, and that is how we ended our conversation.

This story presents a very problematic phenomenon of viewing Shabbat as a mere collection of laws – like the laws of bugs in food, the laws of shemitta, and the like. This is not the case! Shabbat has content beyond the dry laws, important content that must not be given up or treated lightly. In what follows, I will try to explain something about the essence of Shabbat, and from there I will turn to the question of halakhic decision-making with respect to the laws of Shabbat.

The Sanctity of Shabbat – Like that of the Temple

The parasha that we read this week, Parashat Kedoshim, opens as follows:

And the Lord spoke to Moshe, saying, Speak to all the congregation of the children of Israel, and say to them: You shall be holy, for I the Lord your God am holy. You shall fear, every man, his mother and his father, and you shall keep My Sabbaths; I am the Lord your God… You shall keep My Sabbaths, and revere My sanctuary; I am the Lord. (Vayikra 19:1-3, 30)

That is to say, the basic content of holiness is observing Shabbat.[1] But it doesn't end with just observing the day. The Torah goes to the trouble of "embellishing" the passages relating to the Mishkan with commands about Shabbat. In the course of Parashat Ki Tisa, we read:

Therefore, the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between Me and the children of Israel forever; for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day He ceased from work and rested. (Shemot 31:16-17)

And later, at the beginning of Parashat Vayakhel:

And Moshe assembled all the congregation of the children of Israel, and said to them: These are the words which the Lord has commanded, that you should do them. Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you a holy day, a Sabbath of solemn rest to the Lord; whosoever does any work therein shall be put to death. You shall kindle no fire throughout your habitations on the Sabbath day. (Shemot 35:1-3)

A clear message emerges from the "embellishment" of the Mishkan-related passages with commands about Shabbat: if the Mishkan is the sanctuary in place, Shabbat is the sanctuary in time.

This understanding leads to some obvious comparisons between Shabbat and the Mishkan and Temple, which have implications for proper conduct on Shabbat. In general, it can be said that we strive to keep Shabbat, and not only to avoid violating the prohibition to perform a forbidden labor on that day. Moreover, both in the commandment to "remember the Sabbath day" (Shemot 20:8), and in the commandment to "keep the Sabbath day" (Devarim 5:12), the key is in the next word – "to sanctify it": it is man who sanctifies Shabbat.

Leniencies in Halakhic Decision-Making and on Shabbat

Now that we have established the proper conceptual attitude toward Shabbat and its observance, let us turn to the issue of leniency with respect to questions of life-saving activity [pikuach nefesh] on Shabbat.

The basis for any discussion of the subject is, of course, that pikuach nefesh sets aside all the prohibitions of Shabbat, as the Gemara explains at length (Yoma 85). Nevertheless, we cannot be satisfied with the dry halakhic statement that pikuach nefesh sets aside Shabbat law, and nothing else. Beyond the halakha itself, there is a basic Jewish sentiment that should rise up in protest in cases where Shabbat is desecrated – even when that is completely permissible and even obligatory.

This idea can be illustrated through several examples. First, in the year 5739 (1979), I studied with my grandfather, Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik. He was already old, and the doctor informed him that he would have to drink on Yom Kippur. Despite being the "Halakhic man" whom we all know from his writings (including the story of his father wondering why one would cry during the blowing of the shofar [Ish ha-Halakha, pp. 57-58]), and whom we might expect would accept with equanimity the halakhic determination that he would have to drink on Yom Kippur for the sake of pikuach nefesh, he was exceedingly troubled during the two weeks before Yom Kippur, until he managed to arrange an infusion for himself so that he would not be forced to drink on the holy day.[2] This is, of course, a stringency that one need not follow, but the basic motivation to observe the Yom Kippur fast is required of every one of us.

Similarly, in the later years of my father's life, he would occasionally pass out. The first time he fainted, it was Shabbat. When I was informed, I ran from the yeshiva to the house where he was, and a doctor said he should be taken to the hospital. During the conversation between us, my father partially woke up, and protested against his evacuation to the hospital, arguing that it was a desecration of Shabbat. I answered him that if he had been the rabbi and one of his students was in the same situation, it is clear that he would have ruled that Shabbat should be profaned; in this situation, he is the one in danger, and I say that it is necessary to desecrate Shabbat. As soon as I formulated my opinion as a ruling, he agreed to the evacuation, as indeed was appropriate and had to be done, but before that he protested in a most natural way against the Shabbat desecration. We too should experience this reluctance and recoiling from profaning Shabbat.

About a decade ago, in the wake of a terrorist attack, a panel discussion was conducted in the yeshiva on the proper halakhic behavior on Shabbat in situations of pikuach nefesh in general and operational activity in particular. One rabbi on the panel was very lenient about the laws of Shabbat, and even seemed to take some pleasure in his position. After him, Rav Shlomo Levy stood up to speak. Before presenting his position, he began by lamenting the fact that there is a very big problem of treating Shabbat lightly. Even when issuing a lenient ruling, one should cry out "oy gevalt!" This point remains valid: even when ruling that Shabbat should be desecrated, it should not be done with equanimity.

To conclude this point, without going into the question of whether Shabbat was "permitted" or "set aside" in a case of pikuach nefesh,[3] we should all share a basic reluctance to desecrate Shabbat, even when it is mandatory to do so. Every religious soldier who was forced to perform a prohibited labor on Shabbat can testify that he was shocked (at least the first time),[4] a shock that should be instinctive for us as well.

The Policy of Halakhic Decision-Making Regarding Laws of Shabbat

The same basic reluctance to impair the sanctity of Shabbat is also what stands behind the prohibition of electricity on Shabbat: even if it is not entirely clear why electricity is prohibited on Shabbat (see at length the relevant entry in Encyclopedia Talmudit), at the time when electricity began to be used, it was clear to the halakhic authorities that there was a problem with its use on Shabbat, and that it should be prohibited. The reluctance to use it accompanied later rulings as well: when Rabbi Moshe Feinstein permitted the use of a Shabbat clock, he was nevertheless inclined to prohibit its use to turn on air conditioners, because he was concerned about infringing on Shabbat.[5]

About twenty-five years ago, an argument arose between Rav Ezra Bick and the Tzomet Institute. Rav Ezra argued that instead of trying to find roundabout halakhic solutions for medical professionals and the security forces, we should simply permit them (when such behavior is permitted according to the strict law) to perform the prohibited labors, without those solutions, because those solutions have a negative impact on Shabbat. The Tzomet Institute staff argued against him, that it is preferable to reduce the violation of prohibitions, by choosing the less prohibited option first (following Yoma 83a).

I don't know whether Rav Ezra remains firm in his position today, but there is clearly much truth in it. Even if the Tzomet Institute leniencies are officially intended only for medical personnel and the security forces, in practice, they have been "overly" successful in finding leniencies in the laws of Shabbat, reaching the point of harming Shabbat itself.[6] Today, automation can be used for almost everything: one can turn on television with a Shabbat clock! And once again, without going into the question of "uvdin de-chol" and the definition of "avsha milta," it is clear that one should not do that, because of the damage done to Shabbat.

Returning to the comparison to the Temple: my father was once asked whether it was permissible to go up to the Temple Mount, and he answered that regardless of the question of whether we can rely on archaeology in halakhic matters, he did not feel worthy enough to visit the area.[7] To this argument, he also added that he was worried about the day when people would come to the Temple Mount to take pictures like at any tourist site. A few years later, I was in a synagogue in the United States, and among the photos from a recent community trip to the Holy Land, there was a photo from the Temple Mount: my father's concern was justified.

The same problem, or rather, the same requirement, also exists regarding Shabbat: we must treat Shabbat like the Temple. If we are asked, for example, whether it is permissible to study on Shabbat for a test that will be held on Sunday, beyond the question of reading secular books on Shabbat,[8] we should ask ourselves as follows: Can we see ourselves going up to the Temple, and while there, getting in one more review of the lecturer's summary of his course?

Returning to the story with which I began, here is a representative case of the problematic phenomenon of making light of Shabbat: this is a soldier who has a room on the base – not one who has no way to get by – who is trying to find an allowance to desecrate Shabbat in order to eat his mother's delicious cholent and sleep in his own bed. This is clearly not justified – neither halakhically, nor morally. I am sure that precisely after this Shabbat, during which he is "stuck" in his base, he will gain a greater understanding of the sanctity and importance of Shabbat.

[This sicha was delivered on Shabbat Parashot Acharei Mot-Kedoshim, 5780.]