Thursday, February 9, 2012

Chazon Ish: Since prohibition of electricity is not clear - we need to seek out prohibitions for it.

From Dr. Benny Browns book on the Chazon Ish quoting his student Dr. Tzvi Yehuda



8 comments:

  1. That is very interesting. The author describes the Hazon Ish' approach as "meta-halachic". I heard another reference to the Hazon Ish, from a very modern thinking rav, where he could not determine if the eggplant is Ha-etz or Ha-damah. According to what I heard (clarifications would be welcome) the decision was haadama, since ha-etz would prevent it from ever being eaten, as it only survives for 3 years, and would be subject to orlah!
    We wish there were more great poskim today!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think R Moshe felt the same way. Shabbos has to be noticably different and most of the halachos are techniques to produce the desired atmosphere of Shabbos.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm not sure I understand, assuming the conversation is an accurate reflection. If this disturbs ממצוא חפציך then that's enough to enact an איסור that is at least דרבנן. Reb Moshe has a similar approach to Shabbos Clocks, but one can see clearly that he didn't want to permit it for such reasons, except for lights. I would have thought an analysis of electricity which established the questionable issues, after which he said, and as well as this, it will cease looking like שבת, is also intellectually honest. Those who "try and permit it" are very understandable. On the contrary, it is precisely because of the fact that it sure "looks" forbidden, that one needs to establish solid reasons why it is not, and under what circumstances בשעת הדחק it can be used. We see people who don't like the new גרמא switch for exactly this reason, even though, by analysis, they may feel that technically there is no איסור. As we know, you can't carry a balloon on שבת, but indoors, you can carry a ton of bricks and walk around and around the dining room ... and although there is technical carrying we forbid it because it's just not in the spirit of שבת.

    ReplyDelete
  4. page number is 580 you can see on the copy I posted

    ReplyDelete
  5. rav asher weiss is very straightforward - he says it's makeh bpatish which includes anything chazal felt was "not shabbosdik" that didn't fall elsewhere
    kt
    joel rich

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sounds kind of similar to the issur against sheirut le-umi from the 'fifth chelek of SA'. I've long wondered why someone who does not consider the CI to be his Gadol should be impressed by that.

    ReplyDelete
  7. JR: I don't follow. How can one just assign av malachot like that? Either it is or it isn't?

    ReplyDelete
  8. to anonymous; I don't understand how makeh bpatesh would work the way you describe. There are other categories that unshabbosdik things fall under .

    ReplyDelete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.