ASKAbout ASKProgramsOnline LearningPhoto / VideoMediaAtlantaSupport ASK
MBY 335:1-5 Laws relating to a barrel of wine or oil that breaks (abridged)
The previous siman dealt with a fire that broke out on Shabbos, and the fear that the Sages had that the homeowner may forget himself and commit prohibited acts in order to save his possessions. In this siman, the Shulchan Aruch deals with a similar situation, namely, where a large container of food breaks (or begins to) and the food is at risk of being lost.

Here is an introduction of the topic, from the Artscroll Schottenstein Edition of the Talmud, Maseches Shabbos, Chapter 22, page 143b1 and footnotes #1: Mishnah: “Concerning a wine cask that has broken: We may save from it on Shabbos enough provisions for three meals…” The Rabbis prohibited one to rescue more than is needed for Shabbos, lest one come, in his panic to save his wine, to transport additional vessels through the public domain, in violation of the Shabbos. Alternatively, they feared that in one’s eagerness to save all his wine, one might come to repair the cask, which is prohibited. They therefore limited the amount one might save to provisions for the three Shabbos meals… If, however, the cask is only slightly cracked and is leaking at a slow rate, one may save as much wine as he wishes. For since one does not panic over a slow leak, there is no danger that one might be led to violate Shabbos. (More detailed halachos about this and related scenarios can be studied in siman 335.)

As an aside, here is another halacha, related to both the fire situation and the broken barrel, was taught in a different siman. We quote here from the “MBY Archives, MBY 307:19 -

We have learned that “amira l’akum” (lit. asking a non-Jew) – i.e. a Jew requesting a non-Jew to act on the Jew’s behalf where the act is forbidden for the Jew to do himself – is permitted: a) to prevent a monetary loss and b) solely if the act is forbidden by rabbinic, not Torah, law. We now advance a new permit which would allow the non-Jew to do even a Torah-forbidden act. This permit would be useful in the event of a fire or a flood (chas veshalom), where there is no risk to human life, only property damage. The basic idea is that the Jew does not ask the non-Jew to do it; rather, he says to him:
a) “Come here and see what is going on!” When the non-Jew arrives, he will understand that some melacha needs to be done, and he may do whatever it takes to solve the problem. OR, if you think he may need a bit more incentive, say:
b) “Anyone who helps out this situation will not lose (i.e. he will be monetarily compensated)!”
It is noteworthy that it would not be permissible to address the non-Jew personally and say, “If you help out, you will not lose,” because that is considered too direct. [Ed: Remember, the fact that one is “hinting” does not in and of itself permit a non-Jew to do melacha for a Jew. For one, there has to be a great need, and secondly, the melacha must be something that does not provide active benefit to the Jew (i.e. saving something from damage is a passive benefit, not an active one. The bottom line, as we mentioned in a previous lesson, there are hair-splitting distinctions in the application of these laws, and one should not generalize if he is not familiar with the halachos.)

Atlanta Scholars Kollel 2017 © All Rights Reserved.   |   Website Designed & Developed by Duvys Media