[Avodah] goy vs chiloni

[Chana Luntz]

RSM writes:

> The concept  is hasarat hamoneah, a form of gramma.
> This basic idea is that of preventing something from preventing
> something else. Two negatives make a positive, and the desired action
> is performed, albeit very indirectly. In the case cited, the chiloni
> prevented the door from preventing the person's entry.
> 
> This concept is the basis of the gramma instruments of Machon Zomet.
> For example, a photoelectric beam periodically prevents current from
> flowing  in an instrument. Blocking the beam, in and of itself a
> non-melacha, will (inderectly) enable the current to flow after  short
> time, enabling the instrument to function.
> Poskim of Machon Zomet consider this "negative gramma" the ideal form
> of gramma for the instruments it designs for hospital and military
> use, where there is ample halachic basis for leniency in HS.

This seems to be a bit different from the term mevarech ari as used by Rav
Zilberstein.  In this case, as you indicate, "blocking the beam is in and of
itself a non-melacha" and anything that happens after that is, at most,
gramma.  It seems to me that what you describe is indeed a form of gramma,
and Tzomet does not appear to be claiming any different

Rav Zilberstein is describing a scenario where in fact a direct act of
chillul shabbas d'orisa, has been done (eg killing a lion) - by somebody
other than the person who is then deriving the benefit.  The issue is how
far the ripples of a direct act of chillul shabbas spread, in terms of
benefit.

What is puzzling me about this concept of Rav Zilberstein is this:  Some
areas of halacha are, one can argue, underdeveloped, generally because galut
has meant we have not had a great deal of practical experience with them.
But hilchos shabbas is not one of them.  And yet, when I did a Bar Ilan
search on the term Mevarech Ari, it only came up in any of the classic
meforshim under Choshen Mishpat. Now I only have version 8, but it really
does have most of the traditional sources there.  It is possible I missed
some references in the shutim - I subsequently found the reference in
Minchas Shlomo in relation to Shabbas when I was looking for other aspects -
but still, the absence seems to me to be noteworthy.  Why did we not need
Rav Zilberstein's concept before now?

Tzomet's situation is a bit different - because while hilchos shabbas itself
has a lot of commentary on it, trying to devise machines that are shabbas
compatible are obviously something that is relatively new, and you might
expect some new expressions out of that search.  Certainly exploring the
limits of grama for this purpose is something that I would expect them to
do.  But a term like hasarat hamoneah, doesn't strike me as anything more
than descriptive, it doesn't really seem like it is new halacha, but new
application of technology to something which is reasonably obvious from the
halacha (but maybe I am wrong).

Meverech Ari strikes me as different.  It seems to me to be encapsulating a
halachic concept regarding the reaches of the concept of benefit in hilchos
shabbas.  And I suppose I am just a bit surprised to find a new one of those
popping up at this stage in history.

The only thing I can think of as possibly being radically new about our
current situation is the way we are living cheek by jowl with non frum Jews.
I would guess that the minim of more historical times, once they separated
from the Jewish people, didn't want to have anything to do with them, and
benefitting from their hilchos shabbas was probably a relatively rare
occurrence.  

But a concept like Mevarech Ari surely shouldn't only be produced by
interaction with non frum Jews, should it?

> Saul Mashbaum

Regards

Chana