<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-ligatures:standardcontextual;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-ligatures:standardcontextual;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-GB link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72" style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>I was looking at Shemot 3:2 the other day and thinking about the Sne, and it struck me that what Moshe Rabbanu saw in the Sne is described as “aish” and “bo’ar eish” despite it not being consumed. And it struck me that these are the same words used in the pasuk in Shemot 35:3 ie the same root in lo t’vairu aish. Now we usually think of aish as being fuel + oxygen —> carbon dioxide + water, ie the scientific definition of fire – and certainly that is mostly what they were kindling over the years, and what they were avoiding kindling on Shabbat in the midbar.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>But, is not the use of the same words in the pasuk about the Sne suggesting that actually aish is a wider category than fire? And I passed some Xmas trees (well it was that time of year), and I thought to myself – are these not bushes that have fire in them (some of them had flickering LEDs that were good approximations of flames) and yet are not consumed?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>And I wondered if this could be the missing link that we have been looking for? ie perhaps this pasuk in Shemot 3:2 is making it clear that aish, as prohibited over in that pasuk in Shemot 35:3, includes not only what we might think of as classic aish where some fuel has to be consumed, but also where there is production of visible light photons (what else could Moshe has seen – and note it says that he saw, not he felt, the key aspect was the visual, not any warmth that might or might not have been generated) even though no fuel is consumed? Now at the time of the midbar and Chazal, we were not in a position to deliberately generate visible light photons in any other way than by classic fire – but now we are (inter alia LEDs)! And in fact the pasukim were coming to teach us, amongst other things, that such a generation is within the category of fire even if nothing is consumed? And maybe that, inter alia, explains why m’avir is the one melacha explicitly mentioned in the Torah, and not merely learnt out by Torah sheba’al Peh from the melachot in the mishkan?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Have you seen anybody make this link before?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I also thought about the fact that aish hachama is not prohibited for use d’orita and whether that negated what is being said (since aish hachama is produced by nuclear fusion). But given that it takes place in what is, halachically, understood to be shamayim, it seemed to me that it could be excluded for that reason, and were we to manage to produce nuclear fusion here on earth as our primary source of light and heat, we would still understand that as aish, even though again it is not classic fire.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Any thoughts?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Regards<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Chana<o:p></o:p></p></div></body></html>