My problem with that would be that the automatic Sabbath elevator given as an example would be an assertion of control by Jewish people over their environment, and such control would in fact be occurring on the Sabbath, regardless of when the programming of the elevator took place. The environment is equally subject to our control on the Sabbath under this logic, we’re just instructing the control remotely in time.
And there are things called ‘footnotes.’ My preferred translation, the New English Bible, has plenty of them, and some are rather long.
I don’t think that’s right. Bricker listed the categories of melacha, which included a number of things relating to making cloth and building dwellings. If your argument held, observant Jews wouldn’t be able to wear cloth on the Sabbath, since that’s exerting a simple form of environmental control (clothing helps to regulate body temperature), while creating the means at a different time. Nor could one use a house that was nailed together before Shabbat to keep the rain out. A Sabbath elevator is similar to cloth or a house–it’s made and set working before Shabbat, and its use is entirely passive.
I realize that pushing buttons does not fall under the intuitive definition of “work”. On the other hand, I make my livelihood pushing buttons all day, so where’s the line between writing code with a keyboard and computer as a form of work and pushing an elevator button?
This is not an endorsement of Jewish orthopraxis, merely an argument from within its logical structure. And that logical structure relies on axioms which are of presumed supernatural origin and may be considered nonsense by many, including the bulk of contemporary Jews.
FTR, the link shared by Terr was pretty enlightening and even if you disagree with it and consider it to be work, the community which believes in following the letter of the law thinks these go arounds are fine. So who cares if your rules lawyering doesn’t match their generations of rules lawyering (as an attorney, I can attest that different lawyers can come up with different answers to the same question - but the precedent is the one that decides ;))?
In any rate, it isn’t as if the translations from the New Testament Greek into English are always so settled either.
It is a tough concept, because most people when asked who started the fire will say themselves, not some timer.
I am an atheist and most emphatically not Jewish (or any other religion), but I don’t see why that is a tough concept. It’s my understanding that the issue is whether you are allowed to take actions to cause something to happen. If you set a timer on Friday that starts a fire on Saturday, then your action was performed on Friday even though the consequences of that action are on Saturday. Am I missing something here?
OK, I looked at your link. Where does it say what is the Hebrew word in Exodus 20:9 and 20:10 that is usually translated ‘work’?
Breaking the Sabbath by performing work isn’t a sin, it’s merely a transgression of Jewish ritual aw. And Jewish ritual law is only binding on Jews. So your neighbors aren’t doing anything wrong by asking you to turn on the lights for them. They also don’t expect you to keep a kosher kitchen and see nothing wrong with you mixing dairy products and meat products in the same dish, though they would never dream of eating lobster or serving beef stroganoff at their own table.
Nope, not missing anything. It is a fairly simply concept, but I think people are disagreeing with the intent and they assume that translates to poor logic.
? It’s “melacha”. The whole article is about the word.
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0220.htm
מְלָאכָה - that’s the word
From what I understood from what Terr was saying is that the timer is what was starting the fire, not a person. My point is that timers don’t give a darn about starting fires, only people do. Timers count down because people tell them to. They trigger an activity that people want them to trigger. Whether you start the timer a second or a month before the activity, it is you who wants the activity to start on a certain time and the one who caused it to happen at that time.
Say for example, that I set up a gun in my window with a timer that fires a bullet at exactly 3pm. Now the gun is pointed at my neighbors door who I know opens that door at exactly 3pm to take his dog walkies and lets it poo on my front lawn. Is the timer guilty of the murder?
Thanks for clearing that up. Your link never once mentions whether that word is Hebrew or Yiddish, whether it’s from the Torah or the commentaries or what.
So I dusted off my ancient Hebrew-English lexicon (Brown, Driver, Briggs, 1974), and while it has much to say about this word, it doesn’t suggest any particular slant to the work meant by it. I’m sure a few millennia of rabbis, and ultimately Orthodox rabbis, feel otherwise, but you haven’t given me anything that says this is what it means, rather than this is the meaning the rabbis read into it.
I’ll take this idea a bit further, by going back to Terr’s link:
Where’s the state of peace between man and nature if you set up a machine to accomplish on the Sabbath the mastery of nature that you would do personally during the week?
The mastery continues, just as during the week, by your intent and at your direction, by means of your intelligence and skill. Nature is touched and changed. There is no peace between man and nature. By this definition, what is being done to nature matters, and nature doesn’t care whether you set a timer on the crock-pot or whether you turn it on and off yourself.
And yet that is not the interpretation of that definition that rabbinical scholars over the centuries have crafted. I think the Jews who follow these laws understand your objections, but they disagree with them for a variety of reasons. The setting of the timer before the Sabbath makes a huge distinction - and it is by studying the intricacies of the law that Jews believe they discover the truest meaning of God’s laws.
Because of course we really shouldn’t ask rabbis about meaning of words in the Torah. What do they know about it?
I think the analogous question is not who is guilty of murder, but rather when the crime took place. Did you commit a crime at 3pm, or when you set up your gun contraption? It seems to me that the crime itself took place in the setup.
I think the issue is not that setting a timer isn’t work, but rather that the work is done when it’s not the Sabbath, so it’s okay.
I have a question: how do the rules of the Sabbath interact with timezones and daylight savings time? Suppose I live right on the border of a timezone. Suppose at 12:15am I realize “oh, crap, I forgot to send out that email.” Could I dash across the timezone to where it’s 11:15pm, send the email, and return without violating any rules?
What was done up to the point that the trigger is pulled may be a crime, but, imho, it isn’t murder until the bullet does its work.
Shabbat doesn’t start at midnight. It starts at dusk (I believe the ancient criteria is when you hold up a white thread at arms length and can’t see it). There are times, calculated fairly precisely, for every locale. You can’t dash a few meters and the Shabbat start time would be different there. Here’s a web site that will tell you when Shabbat starts at your location: http://www.chabad.org/calendar/candlelighting.htm
Shabbat begins and ends based on local sunset times, so if you’re close to a town in a different time zone, Shabbat begins there an hour earlier or later on the clock than it does for you (depending on which side of the boundary you’re on). If the boundary were in the middle of your street, you’d see your neighbors lighting their Shabbat candles at the same moment as you, even if their clocks showed a different time.