[Avodah] Halacha: How to prepare if you are going to be drafted on Shabbat

[Micha Berger]

On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 09:29:56PM +0200, Shoshana L. Boublil wrote:
: Lieutenant colonel Rabbi Eyal Krim published the instructions at:
: http://www.inn.co.il/News/News.aspx/183953

Along similar lines, I'm attaching two essays from this week's Shabbat
BeShabbato (from the NRP and Machon Zomet).

One is about the limits of the halachic demands of the humanitarian dilemma.
I don't think it goes very far, but I'd like to see us have that
discussion.

The other is more on topic with RnSLB's post; it's about whether one may
take one's tefillin along if they are called to duty on Shabbos.

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:33:11 +0200
From: "Shabbat BeShabbato" <shabbat.beshabbato at gmail.com>
To: dan at zomet.org
Subject: Shabbat-B'Shabbato -- Parshat Shemot

POINT OF VIEW
Humanitarianism -- How Far must we Go?
Rabbi Yisrael Rozen, Dean of the Zomet Institute

I really had hopes that this week we would be able to return to our
mundane routines and to discuss the "wars of the Jews" with respect to
the elections that are coming so soon (or will they be delayed?). But
this is not to be! The campaign in Azza looms too large, and neither our
heads nor our hearts are free to engage in anything else right now. As
we write these lines, we turn towards the Divine armies which continue
to struggle courageously and valiantly against the audacity of the forces
in Azza, which continue to spew out their terrorist missiles.

Dilemmas

Once again we are faced with a humanitarian dilemma, and we must look
at it from the ethical point of view, including our own feelings and
the approach of the Torah. We have discussed this painful subject in
the past, and even though "once it has been written down a Mishna does
not move from its original position," there is room -- together with
my own internal urge -- to discuss it again in the light of current
events. The questions in which we are involved are certainly important
to "humanists" who draw their outlook from the depths of their own
conscience and from accepted ethical and moral codes, as is well known,
"Derech Eretz -- acceptable human behavior -- came before the Torah"
[Tana D'bei Eliyahu 10]. But they are even more vital to wise men of
Torah who are responsible for teaching the message of the Torah and of
Judaism in general, and combining all of this into a way of life.

The classic dilemmas of war and ethics are in the realm of collective
punishment (such as preventing supplies from reaching civilians)
and harming innocent people who are caught up in the fighting. These
questions are relevant and provide a large measure of the media activity
with respect to the war in Azza. It is clear that there are also questions
related to tactical elements such as profitability, since we are always
in need of support and understanding from the world at large, but the
current discussion is at a level of principle and not tactics. In these
matters there is no established halacha -- not in the Rambam or the
Shulchan Aruch, not in the writings of rabbis and authors of responsa
on the subjects of specific scenarios.

It is very easy to gather sources and quotes showing that there is an
"image of G-d" within every human being [Bereishit 1:27], including the
Gentiles, and that it is forbidden to harm any creature, even including
plant life. These statements provide an educational framework and are
halachically binding in a sterile situation, when they are not opposed
by problems of existence, saving lives, or in wartime. Below we give
a small sample of the opposite side: sources from our religion which
emphasize the need to be tough and to act in a cruel way during a war,
while overcoming our natural humanitarian feelings.

Surroundings Which Give Support and Encouragement

The words of the Rambam justifying the revenge of Shimon and Levi on
the entire population of Shechem are widely known: "since Shechem stole
and they saw and knew it but did not punish him." [Hilchot Melachim
9:14]. The question of collective punishment also comes up as a complaint
against Moshe when Korach's community was punished: "If one person sins,
will You then be angry at the whole community?" [Bamidbar 16:22]. But
the Almighty did not pay attention to this rhetorical question. Rather,
in this case we have been taught that "Woe is to an evil person and woe
is to his neighbor" [Rashi, 16:1, based on Bamidbar 12]. From the context
and from the words of the sages we can see that this expression does not
mean to give free reign to the sword such that evil and righteous people
will be killed together. One who looks into the matter will see that the
"neighbor" is punished for active support and for having an influence --
but this is not the right place to expand on this theme.

The Torah writes explicitly about a person who sacrifices his son to the
idol known as the Molech: "And I will pay attention to that man and his
family" [Vayikra 20:5]. "Rabbi Shimon said: How did the family sin? This
teaches you that there in any family with some members who are bandits
all of the people are in effect bandits, because each one provides cover
for the others" [Torat Kohanim, ibid]. The same idea is hinted at in
the previous verse: "and if the people of the land will turn their eyes
away from that man" [20:4]. The punishment is for ignoring the evil,
but this is considered as being as serious as participating in the sin
itself. (See Haamek Davar, written by the Natziv: "they try to save him.")

"There is a Time to Kill... and a Time to Hate" [Kohellet 3:3,8].

The Natziv quotes the above verse in the Torah portion of Noach, when
all of humanity is commanded about the serious crime of spilling blood:
"If one spills blood among mankind, his blood will be spilled" [Bereishit
9:6]. But he precedes this with a comment on the previous verse, that G-d
will demand the punishment for murder, "each man from his brother" [9:5]
-- "The Almighty explains, a man is to be punished at a time when it is
appropriate to show brotherly love, as opposed to a time of war, which
is a time to hate and to kill. And in this case there is no punishment
at all, since this is the way of the world." The Maharal of Prague uses
similar words in justifying the events of Shechem, "This is the way all
wars operate" [Gur Aryeh, Bereishit 34:13].

The Kohen anointed to maintain the morale in a war encourages a fighting
spirit by declaring: "Listen, Yisrael, you are close today to waging
war over your enemies" [Devarim 20:3]. The Mishna gives details of the
order of the day. "This is not like when Yehuda fights Shimon or Shimon
fights Binyamin, such that if you fall into their hands they will have
pity on you... You are going to meet your enemies, who will not have any
mercy if you fall into their hands... Do not have any fear." [Mishna
Sotta 8:1]. What is the message of the Chief Chaplain of the IDF if
not an attempt to spread a feeling against exaggerated mercy? This also
corresponds to the words of the Ramban, "He who is naturally righteous
among the people should put on a face of cruelty and anger when he goes
out to fight the enemy." [commentary on Devarim 23:10]. The Torah warns
the soldiers against their natural instincts by telling them "to guard
against all evil things" [23:10] in the realm of illicit sex and "cover
over your wastes." [23:14]. But it has nothing to say about suppressing
the natural tendency towards cruelty and anger. I submit that this is
quite remarkable!

(Some of the quotes above were taken from an article by Rabbi Meir Batist,
"Collective Punishment," Techumin volume 12, page 229.)

RESPONSA FOR OUR TIMES
Taking Tefillin along on Shabbat
Rabbi Re'eim Hacohen, Rosh Yeshiva and Chief Rabbi, Otniel

Question: If a soldier is drafted on Shabbat in an emergency (or if he
is sent on Shabbat for combat duty which may continue for more than one
day), is he allowed to take along Tefillin to be used later in the week?

Answer: Three factors are involved in the answer to this question: (1) Are
Tefillin considered "muktzeh" -- not to be touched or moved on Shabbat;
(2) The prohibition on Shabbat of making preparations for the weekday;
(3) The Shabbat prohibition of carrying an object beyond the boundaries
of private property.

Muktzeh

The Talmud states that "Shabbat is not a time for Tefillin" [Eiruvin 95b]
but it doesn't explicitly prohibit putting them on during Shabbat. The
violation is explained by the Tosafot (Sanhedrin 68a) as being based
on a fear that they will be carried outside. However, the Zohar quoted
by the Beit Yosef (31) notes that Rashbi says that there is a specific
prohibition of wearing Tefillin on Shabbat or a holiday. This would seem
to imply that wearing Tefillin is a violation of the laws of muktzeh,
since by putting them on one is making use of an object whose use is
forbidden on Shabbat.

On the other hand, the RAMA writes explicitly that Tefillin are considered
an object which can be used on Shabbat (308), so that they can be moved
even if the Tefillin themselves or their place is not needed for another
purpose. TAZ and Magen Avraham question this, based on the ruling of the
Shulchan Aruch following the Zohar (see above), who states that wearing
Tefillin is prohibited, and that therefore the Tefillin themselves are
muktzeh (31). The Mishna Berura rules that in a case of emergency one
can follow the RAMA and be lenient. Thus, in the case of our question
about a soldier, which is clearly an emergency situation, one can rely
on the RAMA and not consider the Tefillin as being muktzeh.

Preparing on Shabbat for a Weekday

The prohibition of preparing for a weekday is relevant even when the
preparation is needed in order to perform a mitzva (Shulchan Aruch 667).
However, the Chayei Adam allows bringing wine on one day of a holiday
for the second day in an emergency, on condition that it be brought
while it is still daytime (such that the wine could conceivably be
used on the first day). This approach is based on the fact that the
prohibition of preparing for a mitzva is a secondary violation. The
Mishna Berura agrees with this approach (7), adding that Tefillin are
needed on Shabbat to provide protection from demons. Based on this,
Rabbi Shlomo Goren ruled that one can take Tefillin with him on Shabbat
(Meishiv Milchama volume 2,71). In my humble opinion, we can add that
the fact that a soldier knows he has his Tefillin with him will help
calm him down before he enters a battle. Thus, we conclude that we can
be lenient with respect to the laws of preparing for a weekday on Shabbat.

Carrying Outside of a Private Area

The third problem with respect to taking Tefillin is moving them from a
private area ("rashut hayachid") to a public area ("rashut harabim") --
or to what is termed a "karmelit," which has properties of both kinds of
area. In the case we are considering, the Tefillin are carried together
with other objects which one is permitted to carry because of a mortal
danger, and the Tefillin are a burden that has been added on to the
permitted one.

The early rabbis disagreed whether an increased load of this type is
prohibited by Torah law or only as a rabbinical decree. The RAN feels that
it is a Torah prohibition (commentary on the RIF, tractate of Beitza),
while the Rashba feels that it is merely a rabbinical decree. One may
then ask if we can be lenient according to the Rashba in the area of a
karmelit, since the entire prohibition of carrying in a karmelit is only
a rabbinical decree in itself. The Chafetz Chaim permitted soldiers to
carry in a karmelit, following the approach of the Rashba, and suggested
that even according to the RAN one can be lenient in areas that are
prohibited only by rabbinical decree (this should be studied further,
since the Mishna Berura accepts the ruling of the RAN, see 318:13).

Recent rabbis have questioned the approach of the Chafetz Chaim, based
on a Baraita which states that one who carries both food and a dish on
Shabbat must bring two Chatat sacrifices to atone for the sin, implying
that adding a heavier load is a Torah prohibition. However, Rabbi Tzvi
Pesach Frank, the Chief Rabbi of Jerusalem, differentiated between a case
of mortal danger, when adding to the load is not prohibited by the Torah,
and a case where the carrying is forbidden, when an added load is indeed
considered separately.

Summary

During a time of war, the mitzva of Tefillin has very special
significance, since one can return from the battlefield because of it,
and we pray that it will be the instrument for fulfilling the verse, "and
he will devour the arm and the forhead" [Devarim 33:20] (as interpreted
by the ROSH). One may therefore be lenient and take his Tefillin, based on
all three elements discussed above: muktzeh, preparation for the weekday,
and carrying from one type of area to another (adding these to other
reasons for being lenient).