Okay, rabotai (gentlemen), boker or. We’re in Chacham David’s sefer (book), on Shulchan Aruch, siman (section) resh-mem-heh: Yehudi harotzeh la'asot shutafut (partnership) im Yehudi she'eino shomer Torah umitzvot umechallel Shabbat (one who desecrates Shabbat) befarhesya. This is a big case: a Jewish person wants to go into business with a nonreligious Jewish person. Veyesh lachush shema oto shutaf ya'avod beShabbat ba'esek zeh hameshutaf lishnehem. It’s very possible the other person will work on Shabbat in this business they share.
Im oto mechallel Shabbat eino yachol limtzo shutafim acherim la'esek zeh, vetalui rak be'oto shehu shomer Torah umitzvot. If he can’t find other Shutafim (partners), and is dependent only on this religious person, that means the nonreligious person can go into business only with the religious person. He can’t find any other partner. You’re making the business possible for him; if it’s not you, he won’t be able to go into it. Asur lehishtatef imo. You can’t go into business with him, because you’re doing lifnei iver (before the blind). You’re going into a business knowing that you’re going to cause him to work on Shabbat and do all that.
Afilu im yitneh imo mitechilah, even if you tell him from the beginning, with the tena'im (conditions) we discussed, that you have nothing to do with Shabbat, you can’t say that Shabbat is yours, because Shabbat can’t be his either: he isn’t religious. Rather, ela tzarich lehatnot be'ofen barur shelo ya'avod ba'esek zeh beShabbat kelal. You have to stipulate clearly that the store will be closed on Shabbat. Vetzarich la'amod al kach: you have to make sure he keeps his word.
Aval im oto mechallel Shabbat yachol limtzo shutafim acherim shehem goyim, or other nonreligious Jewish partners, or he could work by himself without partners, and there is concern that he may work on Shabbat, mutar mei'ikar hadin la'asot imo shutafut. It is permitted according to the strict law to go into partnership with him. Here, you are not making the business possible; he could have started it without you. Be'ofen sheyitneh imo, mitechilat hashutafut she'eino shutaf imo ela biyemot hachol. He has to make the same conditions with him, from the beginning of the partnership, that he is a partner with him only on weekdays.
That’s the case here: making a partnership with Jewish people. Next: Mikol makom nireh shehakol lefi hamakom ulefi hasha'ah, vechol sheyesh chashash shema machamat ken yavo'u lezalzel bikdushat Shabbat, yesh ligdor geder shelo la'asot kelal shutafut im Yehudi sheyesh lachush shema ya'avod ba'esek beShabbat. It depends on the place and the time. There may be chilul Hashem (desecration of God's name), and if the person works on Shabbat, it will cause zilzul (disrespect) for Shabbat. Velachen ra'ui lechol yereh Shamayim sheyitrachek mei'asakim ka'elu. It is appropriate for anyone who fears Heaven to keep away from these kinds of businesses with people who don’t observe Shabbat.
That’s a big, big point. A person who goes into lifnei iver is involved in this whole issue. We’ve finished this siman and are moving on to the next one: resh-mem-heh, yod-chet. Yod-chet is only—one… We don’t have another Aruch Hashulchan? The Rabbi’s? Is the Rabbi’s at home? No? I have another one, Aruch Hashulchan. He brought it. Maybe it’s in the closet. He says here, in resh-mem-heh, vav. Which one is vav? The next one? Kavod, read, phone.
Beit Yosef wrote in se'if vav: Katav Rabbeinu haBeit Yosef bise'if vav, im afu akum betanuro shel Yisrael beShabbat be'al korcho. They baked in his oven against his will—the non-Jews. Venatnu lo pat bischaro: they gave him bread as payment. They said, “Thanks, thanks, thanks. We used your oven on Shabbat, and we want to pay you in bread.” Asur lehanot mimenu. Vechen, if they gave him money, it is forbidden to benefit from it, and the reason for the prohibition is that it is sechar Shabbat (Shabbat wages).
Even though they baked against his will! Interesting. HaRalbach katav dehatam mishum deneheneh mei'isur, keivan de'afu bishvilo; ayein sham. The Ralbach wrote that the reason is that he benefits from a prohibition, since they baked for him. Lefi zeh im natnu ma'ot, mutar; velo nireh ken. That means, since they baked the bread for the Jew, the Ralbach would say that if they paid him in money rather than bread, it could be permitted. He says, “No, that doesn’t seem right.” It doesn’t matter how they pay him.
Vechen yesh mi she'omer dedavka lechatchilah asur lekabel mehem, aval bedi'avad mutar. Some say it is forbidden to accept it initially, but after the fact it is permitted. Velo mashma ken, right? Velo mashma ken milshon Rabbeinu haBeit Yosef. That is not what the wording of Rabbeinu Beit Yosef implies. Omnam miyhu zehu bevadai: im afu gam biyemei hachol mutar lekabel mehem hasachar. That much is certain: if they also baked on weekdays, it is permitted to accept the payment. Aha, that’s havla'ah (inclusion in a larger payment). It is permitted to accept it through havla'ah.
“But there’s a worker in this case, even here against his will.” Right, they could work for them regularly. “But it’s impossible to describe such a case, since it is forbidden—no? It is forbidden for him to bake in your oven on Shabbat.” That’s the problem. You can never let a non-Jew work in your oven on Shabbat, so you’ll never really have a case of havla'ah. Since it’s your oven, it’s like your house. You can’t have melachah (work prohibited on Shabbat) done on your items on Shabbat.
Ve-yesh mi she-omer de-af she-asah issur, ein ne'esar secharo be-di'avad be-havla'ah, kevan she-einah ela mishum mar'it ayin. Some say that even though he did something forbidden, after the fact the payment is not prohibited when it is included in a larger payment, since the prohibition is only because of mar'it ayin (appearance of wrongdoing). That’s a very important principle. The bottom line is, the person worked using your oven, which he shouldn’t have done, but the money is not prohibited after the fact if it is included in a larger payment. That is what the Mishnah Berurah says.
U-mihu nir'eh de-lo amrinan be-zeh ela bi-mekom hefsed gadol (major financial loss). Right. Aval be-zeh adraba, ra'ui le-konso. He says, on the contrary, we are lenient about accepting the money through havla'ah in this case only where there is a major financial loss. He worked in your house or your oven, and therefore, unless it is a major loss, we won’t be lenient. On the contrary, we should penalize him.
That’s all. Maran (our master). We ended here, resh-mem-dalet, resh-mem-heh. “Teach more of your Torah now.” “Yeah, more of your Torah and I’m done.” Ve-chen ikar. Ve-chen pashut she-zehu davka im lo hayah yom ha-shuk be-Shabbat. In our times, when people don’t buy in bulk, and most people buy for Shabbat on Friday, it is clear that this should be treated as though Shabbat were market day. That was yom ha-shuk in the other discussion; fine, it’s out of order.
We’re at section dalet in Shulchan Aruch, resh-mem-heh, dalet. A simple halachah. Im afu einam yehudim be-tanur shel Yisrael beShabbat ba'al korcho ve-natnu lo pat bi-schar ha-tanur, asur lehanot mimenu. They baked in a Jewish person’s oven on Shabbat against his will and gave him bread as payment for the oven. It is forbidden to benefit from it.
The Mishnah Berurah says, se'if katan chaf-gimel: Im afu einam yehudim, ayen be-resh-mem-gimel she-katav de-ayeirei de-lo afu bo rak be-Shabbat. They baked only on Shabbat, so this is not havla'ah. Ve-af al pi chen, af she-ba'al korcho afu bo, im kibel et ha-schar, notel sechar Shabbat. Aval im afu bo od she'ar yamim, mutar. Even though they baked in it against his will, if he accepted the payment, he receives Shabbat wages. But if they baked in it on other days as well, it is permitted, because of havla'ah.
Ve-ayen be-Ve'ur Halachah de-zeh mutar afilu lo hayah ha-afiyah ba'al korcho. That’s a chiddush (novel point): it is permitted even if they didn’t bake against his will. But what’s the problem? They’re baking in his oven. “No, they came and asked him, ‘Can we bake in your oven?’” But they’re not allowed to bake in his oven. It’s a Jewish home; you can’t work on Jewish property on Shabbat. He is saying that even so, after the fact, ve-af de-asah issura ba-meh she-hirshah lahem—although he did something forbidden by giving them permission—mikol makom be-di'avad ein asur ha-sechirut. The payment is not forbidden after the fact, and the prohibition here is only because of mar'it ayin, as we wrote at the end of siman resh-mem-gimel and in Sha'ar ha-Tziyun, se'if katan tet-zayin, tnu lo.
That’s a big chiddush: after the fact, sechar Shabbat is permitted in this case, even though it was forbidden for him to work. Chacham David clarifies the issue of issur hana'ah mi-sechar Shabbat (prohibition against benefiting from Shabbat wages): Be-chol makom she-asru chachamim melechet ha-goy beShabbat, im asah ha-goy ha-melachah beShabbat, asur lehanot mi-sechar otah melachah. Wherever the Sages prohibited a non-Jew’s work on Shabbat, if the non-Jew did the work on Shabbat, it is forbidden to benefit from the payment for that work—even after the fact.
Ve-da'at Maran ve-Rema, afilu im otah melechet ha-goy einah asurah ela mishum mar'it ayin. Maran and the Rema hold that this applies even if the non-Jew’s work is prohibited only because of mar'it ayin, such as renting a bathhouse or an oven to a non-Jew. Lich'orah, renting is not a problem. What is the only prohibition with a bathhouse? Mar'it ayin, as we said: everyone knows it belongs to the Jew, and they may think the non-Jew is a day laborer. So it is prohibited only because of mar'it ayin. Nevertheless, he says the money is forbidden.
Asur lehanot me-ha-ma'ot she-meshalem lo ha-goy avur sechirut yom ha-Shabbat. It is forbidden to benefit from the money the non-Jew pays him for renting it on Shabbat, afilu asah goy ha-melachah ba'al korcho shel ha-Yehudi. Even if he did it against the Jew’s will. Afilu hevi lo ha-goy ha-ma'ot me-atzmo beli she-yivakesh: even if the non-Jew brought the money without being asked. Ve-hevi lo be-havla'ah: even if he paid it as part of a larger payment. Asur lehanot me-chelek ha-ma'ot shel sechirut yom ha-Shabbat. You have to take out the Shabbat portion. Ve-chol she-ken keshe-haytah melechet ha-goy beShabbat asurah min ha-din. All the more so when the non-Jew’s work on Shabbat was prohibited by law.
So he argues with the Mishnah Berurah. What’s the case? You rented it to him. “I told him, ‘Don’t work on Shabbat.’” And he worked. Shabbat morning, you smell the bread, and the person says, “You know what? I was having a party. Here’s a loaf.” “He had a party.” “Exactly.” The Mishnah Berurah says that after the fact, if it is included in a larger payment, take it. Havla'ah means, “I’m paying you with this loaf along with the loaves for the other days.” After the fact, take it. The Mishnah Berurah has a rule: anything prohibited only because of mar'it ayin is permitted after the fact, as far as the money is concerned. He says, “No way.”
Ve'af al pi she-goy she'asah melachah mishum hefsed yehudi hitiru la'acherim lehanot me'otah melachah bemotza'ei Shabbat, haynu davka bichdei sheya'asu. Even though, when a non-Jew did work because of a Jew’s financial loss, the Sages permitted others to benefit from that work after Shabbat, that was specifically after enough time had passed for the work to be done. Why do we require bichdei sheya'asu? Because you don’t want someone to benefit from that work immediately. They made him wait so that he would not benefit from the work.
Mah she'ein ken sechar Shabbat: that is not the same as Shabbat wages. The benefit is the money itself. What are you going to do, wait? The money is the benefit. There is no point in waiting; the benefit is right there.
Then he brings a yesh omerim: Ve-yesh omerim she'im haytah otah melachah asurah mishum mar'it ha'ayin, u-chegon she-hiskir beit merchatz o tanur lemeshech shavua, yesh lehakel lekabel me-hagoy et ha-ma'ot shel Shabbat be-havla'ah beyachad im ha-ma'ot shel yemei ha-shavua. Some say that if the work was prohibited because of mar'it ayin—for example, if he rented out a bathhouse or oven for a week—it is possible to be lenient and accept the money for Shabbat as part of the payment for the week. This applies even if the non-Jew did the work with the Jew’s consent, and certainly if he did it against his will, where the work itself was prohibited by law. That is the Mishnah Berurah.
Uminhag Ashkenazim, harotzeh lismoch al devarim eleh, yesh lo al mah sheyismoch. Ve'im yesh hefsed merubah, yesh lehakel beminhag Ashkenazim. But the custom of Sephardim and the Eastern communities, who follow Maran’s rulings, is not to be lenient and use any money that comes from the profit of a non-Jew’s work on Shabbat, even where there is a major financial loss.
Wow. He is stringent; he goes against the Mishnah Berurah. According to Maran, he says, there is no room to take any of this money—the money, the loaf, whatever it is. “Even if he waited the required time afterward?” No. There is no waiting time. You are taking money; money does not involve waiting.
Where does he get this from? Mikol makom, leda'at Maran haShulchan Aruch, yesh lehachmir le'esor sechar Shabbat bechol inyan, ve'afilu keshehayah davar asur mishum mar'it ha'ayin, ve'afilu be-havla'ah, ve'afilu keshehayah be'al korcho. According to Maran, one should be stringent and prohibit Shabbat wages in every case: even when the matter was prohibited because of mar'it ayin, even when the payment was included in a larger payment, and even when it happened against the person’s will.
It is brought in Kaf Hachayim as well. Gam bimkom hefsed yesh lehachmir. He brings the Kaf Hachayim: even where there is a loss, one should be stringent. What is he basing this on? What is the Shulchan Aruch he is basing it on?
Vehineh Maran haBeit Yosef besiman resh-mem-gimel hevi beshem teshuvat haGe'onim, beshem Rabbi Natronai Ga'on, she-nish'al al Yisrael she-hiskir be-isur merchatz le-goy. The Beit Yosef, in siman resh-mem-gimel, brings in the name of a responsum of the Geonim, in the name of Rabbi Natronai Gaon, a question about a Jew who improperly rented a bathhouse to a non-Jew: im secharo mutar o asur—whether the payment was permitted or forbidden.
Veheshiv, de'avad issura velo ya'amid beyad ha-goy secharo, shekvar hu mutar. He answered that the Jew had acted improperly, and should not leave the payment in the non-Jew’s hands, since it had already become permitted. Vechatav al zeh haBeit Yosef, sheleda'at haRambam vehaMordechai, ne'esar ha-sechar shebeyad ha-goy. The Beit Yosef wrote that according to the Rambam and the Mordechai, the payment in the non-Jew’s hands is prohibited. He says it is forbidden; the Beit Yosef says that money, and I’m going to write about it in resh-mem-heh.
Uvesiman resh-mem-heh, our siman, the Beit Yosef brings in the name of the Mordechai that if non-Jews baked in a Jew’s oven on Shabbat against his will and gave him bread as payment for the oven, it is forbidden to benefit from it. The Mordechai further wrote that all Shabbat wages are forbidden even after the fact. He brings the Mordechai here and bases it on the Rambam. So he does not accept the other view.
Ve-chen pasak Shulchan Aruch kan, she'im afu goyim betanuro shel Yisrael beShabbat be'al korcho, venatnu lo pat bischar ha-tanur, asur lehanot mimenu. The Shulchan Aruch ruled here that if non-Jews baked in a Jew’s oven on Shabbat against his will and gave him bread, it is forbidden to benefit from it. Ve-chen haRema behagahah beresh-mem-gimel katav she'im avar vehiskir ha-merchatz, yesh omerim she-secharo mutar veyesh omerim she-asur, ve-chen ikar, ve-chen pasku ha'acharonim. The Rema also wrote in his gloss on resh-mem-gimel that if someone went ahead and rented out the bathhouse, some say the payment is permitted and some say it is forbidden; the latter is the main position, and that is how the later authorities ruled.
Mikol makom nir'eh sheleda'at haRema, im yesh mekom hefsed, yesh lehakel. Nevertheless, it seems that according to the Rema, where there is a loss, one may be lenient. He relies on the Rosh to be lenient in a general contract or a general rental. Fine, but that is not Maran.
So we learned a halachah today. Bottom line, according to Maran, even after the fact, we can never benefit from the non-Jew’s money, even when the issue is only mar'it ayin, even if it was only forbidden for that reason, even if it happened against the person’s will, and even if it was included in a larger payment. That is all the Torah on that point.
He finishes here: Uvimkom she-asur lehishtamesh ba-ma'ot haba'im misechar Shabbat, yesh lehachmir af shelo latet ma'ot elu la'acherim, ve-chen ein lo reshut letitnam litzdakah. Where it is forbidden to use money that came from Shabbat wages, one should be stringent even about giving that money to other people; he has no permission to give it to tzedakah (charity).
I would have said, “I can’t benefit from the money, so I’ll give it to tzedakah.” No, you can’t even give it to tzedakah. Veyesh mi she-katav shemutar latet ma'ot sechar Shabbat litzdakah. Some say it is permitted to give Shabbat wages to tzedakah. “You don’t know who gave it, and velo tihyeh lo”—so he should not get any benefit from it. Give it anonymously. You can’t take the money and then put your name on the building. “Put the name on the building.” Exactly. If it comes from Shabbat wages, the person gets a tovat hana'ah (benefit of recognition), and they can’t even thank him. They have to take the money anonymously.
Who is that? Se'if katan mem-gimmel? Ayein be-Shut Igrot Moshe. That’s Rav Moshe Feinstein. Okay, that’s a good one. Chazak u-varuch. Let’s go to resh-mem-vav. “Are we having a gathering? What kind is this?” “21 at Frankel.” Ute'amo shel davar she-kodem she-ne'esar mishum mar'it ayin, ke'achshav she-ne'esar, ve'im yachol likach sechirut bazeh… asur sechar…” Yes, ve-chen he'elah ba-Aruch Hashulchan. Aruch Hashulchan was also against taking the money.
We’re starting the new siman. Before we finish this siman, rabotai, let’s read the whole siman again, resh-mem-vav, so we remember the Shulchan Aruch. “Yisrael ve-eino Yehudi she-shutafin, heich yitnahagu beShabbat, u-vo vav se'ifim.” A Jew and a non-Jew who are partners: how should they conduct themselves on Shabbat? It has six sections.
“Alef: Yisrael ve-eino Yehudi she-yesh lahem sadeh, o tanur, o merchatz, o rechayim shel mayim bi-shutafut, o she-hem shutafim be-chanut bi-sechorah, o im hitnu mi-techilah bi-sha'ah she-ba'u lehishtatef, she-yehe sechar ha-Shabbat le-eino Yehudi levado, im me'at ve-im harbeh, u-sechar yom echad keneged yom ha-Shabbat le-Yisrael levado, mutar. Ve-im lo hitnu mi-techilah, kesheyavo'u lachlok, notel eino Yehudi sechar ha-Shabbatot kulam, ve-hashe'ar cholkim oto. Ve-im lo hayah sechar ha-Shabbat yadua, yitol ha-eino Yehudi levado shevi'it ha-sechar, ve-cholkim ha-she'ar.”
Go to Shulchan Aruch, section bet: “Heicha she-hitnu ba-techilah, im achar kach bi-she'at chalukah nitratzah ha-eino Yehudi lachlok be-shaveh, mutar.” That was kula de-Maran. They made a condition, and at the time of dividing the profits, the non-Jew agrees to divide them equally. That is permitted.
“Heicha she-lo hitnu ba-techilah, yesh tikkun.” If they did not make a condition from the beginning, there is a way to fix it: “al yedei she-yachzir ha-mocher lahem dmei ha-karka, o yimkeru le-ish acher, ve-yachzeru ve-yiknu bi-shutafut, ve-yitnu bi-she'at ha-keniyah. Ve-im nishtatfu be-chanut ve-lo hitnu, yachzor kol echad ve-yitol chelko, vi-yvatlu ha-shutafut, ve-achar kach yachzeru lehishtatef, ve-yitnu ba-techilah. Ve-im kiblu ha-karka la'asot bo melachah bi-shutafut, yevatlu ha-shituf ve-yimchalu zeh la-zeh, ve-achar kach yachzeru lehishtatef ve-yitnu ba-techilah.”
Section dalet: “Yachol Yisrael liten le-eino Yehudi ma'ot lehit'asek bahem, ve-af al pi she-eino Yehudi noseh ve-noten bahem beShabbat, cholek imo kol ha-sechar be-shaveh, lefi she-ein melachah zo muteret le-Yisrael la'asotah she-nomar she-eino Yehudi oseh shelichuto, ve-chen ein ha-esek nikar le-mi she-hu”—what? “Mi hu.”
Section heh: “Mutar le-Yisrael liten sechorah le-eino Yehudi limkor, im katzatz lo sechar, u-vilvad she-lo yomar lo: ‘Mechor beShabbat.’”
“Tanur she-lekacho Yisrael mashkon be-eino Yehudi”—remember this case? He received the oven as collateral from a non-Jew. The Jew lent the non-Jew money, and the non-Jew gave him an oven as collateral, not as an inclusion in a larger payment but as security. “Ve-kibel alav ha-eino Yehudi she-mah she-ya'aleh sechar ha-tanur yiten be-ribit me'otav.” The Jew stipulated that the oven’s profits would pay down the loan and pay its interest. “Mutar litol sechar Shabbat.” Why? Although the collateral belongs to the Jew, the oven is in the non-Jew’s possession. “Lefi she-hu bi-reshut ha-eino Yehudi. Ve-ein le-Yisrael chelek bo.” The Jew has no share in it; it is only collateral. “Ve-gam ein Yisrael omer lo la'asok be-Shabbat.” I didn’t tell you to work on Shabbat; I only said to share the profits. “Ve-eino Yehudi ki ka tarach, bi-nafshei tarach lekayem tena'o.” He is working for himself, to fulfill his condition. He wants to pay that back today.
Section vav: “Im afu einam Yehudim be-tanuro shel Yisrael beShabbat al korcho, ve-natnu lo pat bi-sechar ha-tanur, asur lehanot mimenu.” We saw that Chacham David is stringent here, but he could not be stringent at all. Maybe he could give the money to charity anonymously, as we said from Rav Moshe.
Now, resh-mem-vav: what is this section about, rabotai? It has many sections. “Resh-mem-vav: dinei hasha'alah vehaskarat kelim leshe'eino Yehudi”—the laws of lending and renting utensils to a non-Jew. “Bechavod, sa…” Katav haRambam beperek vav, din tet-zayin: “Mutar lehash'il kelim ulehaschkiran leshe'eino Yehudi, ve-af al pi shehu oseh melachah bahem beShabbat, mipnei she'ein anu metzuvim al shevitat kelim (resting of utensils).”
Very important: we do not have a law requiring utensils to rest. Our utensils can work on Shabbat. I can lend a non-Jew my car and he can drive it on Shabbat. “But it’s my car.” So what? Shevitat kelim: it doesn’t say my car can’t work on Shabbat. Animals are different. “Aval behemtov ve'avdo asur, mipnei she'anu metzuvim al shevitat behemah va'eved, ad kan leshono.” His behemah (animal) and eved (servant) are forbidden, because we are commanded regarding the resting of an animal and a servant.
Since the Rambam did not write that it is forbidden to lend or rent utensils on Friday, we infer that he holds it is permitted even on Friday, although the baraita says, “Lo yaskir adam kelav be'erev Shabbat le-akum, u-be-dalet ve-heh mutar.” Why did the Rambam say it is permitted? It sounds like you can lend it to him even on Friday, whereas the Gemara was stringent and allowed it only on Wednesday and Thursday. “Sevira leh she-ein halachah ken.” He doesn’t hold that this is the halachah. Ve-chen da'at haRif she-hishmit baraita zo, ayein sham. The Rif also holds this, since he omitted that baraita.
It could be that the baraita follows Beit Shamai, who say there is shevitat kelim, so they allow it only on Wednesday and Thursday. But according to us, who say there is no shevitat kelim, even Friday is permitted. Not for a servant or your animal? No: a servant and an animal are never permitted. We are talking only about utensils.
Aval raboteinu ba'alei ha-Tosafot verov ha-poskim sevira lehu debaraita zo hi ledina, ve'ein ha-ta'am mishum shevitat kelim, ela mishum dechishemashkiro be'erev Shabbat, mechzei kenotel sechar Shabbat. But our Rabbis, the Tosafot, and most authorities hold that the baraita is the law. The reason is not shevitat kelim. When you rent it out on Friday, it looks as though you are taking Shabbat wages. People see the person leaving the house on Friday and giving you money, so it looks as though you rented it to him for Shabbat itself. That is a gezeirah (rabbinic decree). If I lend it on Thursday or Wednesday, it’s no big deal; nobody knows. But on Friday, someone leaves the house with the car and pays you, so there is a decree.
Ve'af al gav de-sechar Shabbat hu be-havla'ah im she'ar yamim—although the Shabbat payment is included with the other days. Otherwise, it would be forbidden in every case, as payment for Shabbat alone. Nevertheless, when you rent it on Friday and the first day of the rental begins on Shabbat, it looks like Shabbat wages. Mechzei kesechar Shabbat, ve'asur.
That’s a big point: you can’t begin the contract on Shabbat, because people will think you rented it for Shabbat. Ve'im hu maskir ve-choshev kol yom bifnei atzmo, asur, afilu be-dalet ve-heh. If he rents it and calculates each day separately, it is forbidden even on Wednesday or Thursday. That’s another problem. It depends how you rent the car. If you rent it at a daily rate—say, $32.50 a day—then you’re charging separately for Shabbat. That’s how you rent cars, isn’t it, by the day? They tell you $32.50 times seven. “But how do they get the weekly rate?” “From the daily rate.” So that is a problem because you’re receiving Shabbat wages. It has to be real havla'ah.
Vezehu mamash sechar Shabbat, ulefi zeh yesh isur bechol minei kelim, af otam she'ein bahem melachah, lehaskir be'erev Shabbat. Correct. There are two issues here. There is the question of the non-Jew using your utensil on Shabbat, which is not a problem. The problem is getting paid.
There is another view. That is the third view. The first view is the Rambam, who says you can even lend or rent the utensil on Friday; there is no concern of mar'it ayin. Then Tosafot say Friday is forbidden because of a decree based on mar'it ayin.
Veyesh od shitah le-Rabeinu Yonah, de-mefaresh baraita zo lo bechol ha-kelim, ela be-kelim she'osim bahem melachah, kemo kardom umachreshah vechayozei bahem. Ve-lo mishum shevitat kelim, ela mipnei she-keshe-mashkir lo keli kazeh be'erev Shabbat, veha-socher ha-she'eino Yehudi matchil la'asot bah beShabbat, mechzei ke-shelucho shel Yisrael la'asot melachto beShabbat. There is another view, that of Rabeinu Yonah: the baraita is not about all utensils, but only utensils used for work, such as an axe or plow. The reason is not shevitat kelim. When you rent him such a utensil on Friday and the non-Jew begins working with it on Shabbat, it looks as if he is the Jew’s agent to do his work on Shabbat.
But utensils that are not used for work may be rented even on Friday, since it does not look like Shabbat wages when the rental is for a week. So Rabeinu Yonah is not concerned about Tosafot’s concern regarding utensils that are not used for work. If it’s Friday, people know the payment is included with the other days, so they are not concerned about Shabbat wages. He is concerned only about utensils used for work on Friday, or rented for a month, where Shabbat is included with the other days.
Ve'al zeh, im nomar de-cheshe-matchil be'erev Shabbat mechzei ke-sechar Shabbat, im ken, mai irya le-eino Yehudi? Afilu Yehudi nami asur. Why does the Gemara say not to lend or rent utensils to a non-Jew on Friday? It should say the same about a Jew. If the issue is mar'it ayin because of Shabbat wages, then it should be forbidden even with a Jew.
“Ve'im tish'ol, keivan de-vazeh lo chasheshu, lamah chasheshu sheyomru shelucho hu?” If they aren’t concerned that people will think it’s Shabbat wages, why are they concerned that people will think he is an agent? Yesh lomar: hata'am mishum de-ein derech lehaskir ha-mikach kol yom bifnei atzmo, ela leshavua o lechodesh, vehavei be-havla'ah. The reason is that it is not customary to rent it one day at a time, but for a week or a month, and that is included in a larger payment. Ve-leit kan bazeh chashada, aval bazeh vadai yesh lachshod shehu shelucho la'asot melachto. There is no suspicion in that case, but here there is certainly concern that people will suspect he is the Jew’s agent doing his work.
So the bottom line is: you lent him a drill or rented him a drill, and suddenly he goes out on Shabbat—brrr—to work. People walking around the person’s house with the drill will probably think he sent him to do work for him.
This is all about renting it and receiving payment. But lending him a utensil is permitted even on Friday. “Ulehash'il lo keli mutar afilu be'erev Shabbat.” Not only according to Tosafot, because with a loan there is no concern that it looks like Shabbat wages, since he receives nothing, but even according to Rabeinu Yonah, who is discussing utensils used for work, and who prohibits it because it looks as if the borrower is the Jew’s agent, there is no concern in the case of lending.
That’s a psak (halachic ruling). Why is there no concern in the case of lending? “De-ha-chashash eino ela keshe-Yisrael notel ma'ot umagia lo tovah mimah she-ha-eino Yehudi mishtamesh bah beShabbat, shapir chasheshu shema yomru, aval bish'eilah lo chasheshu.” The concern is only when the Jew takes money and receives a benefit from the non-Jew’s use of the utensil on Shabbat. Then people might say something. But with lending, they are not concerned.
So the only concern is that people will say something when the Jew is receiving money. When the Jew gets money, he gets a tovat hana'ah, and people may say, “He’s receiving money and sent him to work for him on Shabbat.” If he gets no money, they won’t say that. “But how do they know? They don’t know. They’re just making up whatever concern; they don’t know anything.” That is mar'it ayin.
Could it be that it’s not mar'it ayin? Could it be your own concern—that you might think you’re receiving Shabbat wages, rather than other people’s concern? “I think I’m getting Shabbat wages.” No, that’s not what he means by mar'it ayin here. It could also be an issue for the person himself, but that is not the mar'it ayin he is discussing. He means what other people will see: they see him coming out of the house on Shabbat and make a mistake. If he takes money, they may say, “He’s an agent.”
“I don’t know what the difference is. If he takes money, it’s the same drill, the same everything. Same picture. What’s the difference?” “No money.” “On the contrary, it would be exactly the same.”
Ve-hare'ayah lazeh, bemah shenitba'er besiman resh-nun-bet, de-mutar liten orot le'abdan, le'ovdan ve-chelim lechoves erev Shabbat. You’re permitted to give hides to a tanner and clothes to a cleaner on Friday. Why weren’t they concerned that people would say he is the Jew’s agent? “Ela mishum de-sham eino magia tovah le-Yisrael bemah she'oseh beShabbat, velo chen bischirut.” There is no benefit to the Jew from the work he does on Shabbat; it is different with a rental.
That means that with a rental, I am hiring him, and that’s what people will think. When I give the cleaner things to clean, I don’t care when he cleans them. I pick them up Monday, so I don’t care whether he does it on Shabbat, Sunday night, or Monday morning before netz. I don’t get a benefit from his doing it on Shabbat. But with a rental, I give him the utensil on Friday and he pays me rent, so it looks like I rented it to him for Shabbat to do work. That is a problem when I get money. If I don’t get money, there is no concern.
The Rema rules like Rabeinu Yonah. If he rules like Rabeinu Yonah, that means only utensils used for work are forbidden to rent on Friday for money. That is Rabeinu Yonah, and that is the Rema. Veta'amo nir'eh mishum dehi sevara memutza'at bein haRif vehaRambam, memutza'at bein haTosafot vehaSemag ve'od poskim she'asru bechol ha-kelim. The reason seems to be that this is an intermediate position between the Rif and the Rambam, who permit renting all utensils on Friday, and Tosafot, the Semag, and other authorities, who prohibit renting all utensils. Rabeinu Yonah permits utensils that are not used for work and prohibits utensils that are used for work. Halachah kedivrei hamachria. The Rema took the deciding, middle view.
Ve'od katav de-mutar lehash'ilo be'erev Shabbat, af al gav she-matneh she-ha-eino Yehudi yachzor veyash'il lo, velo amrinan dechi hai gavna dahavei ke-sechirut. He also wrote that it is permitted to lend it to him on Friday, even if he stipulates that the non-Jew will lend something back to him, and we do not say that this arrangement is like renting. What is the case? You can lend it on Friday even though he says, “You’ll have to lend it back to me too.” We don’t say that the reciprocal lending is considered rental. It is still considered free.
Ve'amar, af al gav de-zehu ke'ein ke'ein sechirut, de-mai de-mah li im meshalem lo bime'ot o betashmish kelim, mikol makom, keivan de-lo havei bederech sechirut mamash, lo chashu lazeh davar she-eino ela chashash chashada. He says that even though this is somewhat like rental—what difference does it make whether he pays in money or with use of utensils?—nevertheless, since it is not an actual rental arrangement, they were not concerned about a matter that involves only suspicion.
Open up the Shulchan Aruch, halachah alef, rabotai. Let’s see what Maran holds. “Mutar.” How would mar'it ayin apply if they know it’s your car? “The seudah has a van, you know.” If you rented a van to the non-Jew, that’s a big question. Lich'orah, we’re discussing a case where it is not known that the item belongs to you. There is no sign on the car. If there is a sign, people may think, “That’s a Jewish van. He’s driving a van? Oof.” It’s a good question. Let’s see.
“Mutar lehash'il ulehaskir kelav le-eino Yehudi, ve-af al pi shehu oseh bahem melachah beShabbat, mipnei she-einanu metzuvim al shevitat kelim. Yesh omrim de-kelim she'osim bahem melachah, kegon macharesha vechayotzei bah, asur leYisrael lehaskir le-eino Yehudi be'erev Shabbat, uveyom chamishi mutar lehaskir lo.” That is Rabeinu Yonah. “Uvilvad shelo yitol sechar Shabbat ela be-havla'ah, kegon she-yaskir lo lechodesh o leshavua. Aval lehash'ilo mutar afilu be'erev Shabbat.”
But lending is permitted even on Friday. Maran went like the Rambam, correct? And Rabeinu Yonah? No, that is the yesh omrim. He did not distinguish between types of utensils or days of the week; that is the Rambam. If you look at the alef, the Rambam is finished. Leave the yesh omrim for a moment. Look at the Mishnah Berurah. Can you lend someone a drill? “Chazak, hold on. Can you borrow?” “Oh, yeah, no problem.” “I want to rent your drill.” “No problem.” “The drill is going to be working on Shabbat.” So what? Shevitat kelim: there is no law that my utensils cannot work on Shabbat.
The Mishnah Berurah says: “Hu da'at haRif vehaRambam, u-sevira lehu de-ha detanya lo yaskir kelav le-eino Yehudi be'erev Shabbat, u-verevi'i u-vachamishi mutar, hu mi-ta'am shevitat kelim de-asur. Atya ke-Veit Shamai, de-sevira lehu adam metzuvah al shevitat kelav, kemo al shevitat behemto. Ve-kaima lan de-sevira lehu shevitat kelim ein adam metzuvah alav. Umimeila mutar lehash'il ulehaskir kelav afilu be'erev Shabbat, afilu kelim she'osim bahem melachah.”
Finished. “Mikol makom, gam hem sevira lehu de-chol ha-kelim ein heiter lehaskir rak be-havla'ah.” That’s another issue. There are two issues: the utensils, and the money. We can take care of the payment by including it in a larger payment. “Aval al Shabbat lechud, afilu im maskiram bitchilat ha-shavua, de-zeh havei ke-sechar Shabbat.” We agree that payment for Shabbat alone is a problem, even if you rent them at the beginning of the week. That has to be through havla'ah. No one disagrees about that. “De-al zeh lo matzinu mi she-mekel.”
The yesh omrim is the view of Rav Rabeinu Yonah: “De-hach baraita lo asrah mishum shevitat kelim, ela de-kulei alma atya.” The Wednesday-and-Thursday rule applies according to everyone, even according to the view that there is no shevitat kelim. So why do we require Wednesday or Thursday? Because we are talking about utensils used for work, and if I hand them over on Friday, it looks as though he is my agent. That is the whole Torah here.
“Ve-hata'am de-cheshemoser be'erev Shabbat et ha-kelim she'osim melachah bahem, veha-eino Yehudi ya'aseh bahem miyad beShabbat, nireh kemo she'oseh melachto bishlichuto shel Yisrael, vezeh asur, de-amirah le-eino Yehudi shevut.” That is also a decree. Mar'it ayin on a rabbinic prohibition, by the way. It is mar'it ayin: what did I do? I told the non-Jew to do something. At worst, it is amirah le'akum. The mar'it ayin makes it more stringent. Fine.
“Ve'af al gav de-visiman resh-nun-bet se'if bet ita de-shari liten orot le'abdan im chashechah, de-eino Yehudi ada'ata denafshei ka'avid, keivan de-katzatz lo damim.” We learned that you can give things to the tanner right before sunset. You give him a fixed price. I didn’t tell him when to do the leatherwork, so apparently, why can’t I give him the drill? Because there I am paying the non-Jew. Here, the non-Jew is paying me. “Shani hatam she-ein revach le-Yisrael ba-mah she-ha-eino Yehudi oseh beShabbat.” There, the Jew gets no profit from what the non-Jew does on Shabbat.
“Aval bischirut kelim yadua hu she-im yatneh im ha-eino Yehudi she-yishbot ba-kelim beShabbat, lo yiten lo sechirut kol kach.” If I tell him, “I’ll rent you my utensils, but I don’t want you to use them on Shabbat,” he may not rent them. “My utensils keep Shabbat.” He might say he’s not interested and go somewhere else. So he gets some benefit from their being used on Shabbat. When I give things to the cleaner, I don’t care when they’re cleaned. But when I rent out my utensils, I’m receiving money. There may be some benefit to me from the non-Jew’s working with them on Shabbat; he might not have rented them if he couldn’t use them then. Therefore, it looks as if I’m benefiting. But you rented him kablanut anyhow, so which...? What is kablanut? I’m saying, when you rent to him... Yeah, but on erev Shabbat, that’s the problem. On Tuesday, on Wednesday, Thursday, no problem. Nobody thinks of it, but right before Shabbat, the mar'it ayin kicks in.
“Hilkach, keivan she-yesh revach le-Yisrael ba-meh she-ha-kelim niskarim etzel ha-eino Yehudi bistama, oseh bahem melachah beShabbat, masik she-yesh lachush le-Yisrael hazeh. Mah she-ein ken kshemoseir lo berivi'i va-chamishi, mutar. Kulei alma yada.” So there is a concern in this case, whereas when he gives it to him on Wednesday or Thursday, it is permitted. “Nu, okay. Hazeh kulei hai kashya lechu.”
Now look at the cellphone question, number ten. Look at number one in Garry's book: “Ulehaskir keli she-mefursam shehu shel Yisrael… makom mefursam.” Mateh Yehudah wrote that it is permitted. From the plain meaning of the authorities in the Shulchan Aruch, it appears they did not distinguish, regarding renting or lending utensils, between utensils known and publicly recognized as belonging to a Jew and those that are not.
“Maran lo megi'a chiluk. Aval bedivrei haMagen Avraham ve-ha-Peri Megadim huchrach le'esor.” But the words of the Magen Avraham and the Peri Megadim make it necessary to prohibit it. “Lakhen katav Minchat Kohen, velakhen katav be-Kaf Hachayim, im lo she-ha-derech lehaskir ha-keli o lemosro ba'arisut, she-az yesh lehatir, ayen sham.” Therefore, Minchat Kohen wrote, and Kaf Hachayim wrote, that it is permitted if the usual practice is to rent out the utensil or give it over under an arrangement with a share in the proceeds.
Continue: “U-keli shenikar shehu shel Yisrael, aval lo shel zeh… shel eizeh Yisrael, kegon tallit.” A tallit. Look in the Mishnah Berurah, siman resh-mem-dalet. That’s a good one: can you send a tallit to the cleaners? We had this question. “She-necheliku bazeh haMagen Avraham ve-ha-Tosefet Shabbat, she-le-da'at haMagen Avraham yesh lachush mishum mar'it ayin, ve-le-da'at ha-Tosefet Shabbat mutar, ve-chen pasak be-Shut Yechaveh Da'at.” The Magen Avraham and Tosefet Shabbat disagree about this. According to the Magen Avraham, there is concern about mar'it ayin; according to Tosefet Shabbat, it is permitted, and that is also the ruling in Yechaveh Da'at.
That’s a good one, because when the cleaner cleans the tallit on Shabbat, people don’t know whose it is. So it is permitted. “Keli she-mefursam shehu shel Yisrael, bimkom mefursam, ve-ha-derech lehaskiro bi-sechirut yomit… Ve-hu maskiro lo bi-sechirut shevu'it o chodshit, de-hainu be-havla'ah, im yesh lachush le-mar'it ayin she-yomru she-hiskiro lo be-ofen ha-asur, de-hainu bi-sechirut yomit, she-yesh bazeh mishum sechar Shabbat.” The question is about an item publicly known to be Jewish property, in a public place, when the usual practice is to rent it by the day, but the person rents it by the week or month, including Shabbat in the larger payment. Could people suspect that it was rented in the forbidden way, by the day, which would involve Shabbat wages?
“Nistapek be-chai yotzei bazeh Maharach Abul'afya, u-maskanato lehatir.” Maharach Abul'afya was uncertain about a similar case, and concluded that it is permitted. So, by the way, so far they are being lenient.
“Maskir rechev le-goy be'erev Shabbat, ve-ha-goy oseh bo beShabbat.” You rent the car; no problem. “Afilu im ha-davar yadua u-mefursam she-rechev zeh shel Yisrael peloni.” Even if it is known and publicized that the car belongs to a particular Jew, it is permitted. “Ein lachush be-ofen zeh le-mar'it ayin, she-yomru she-sachar et ha-goy la'asot melachto be-rechev shelo, she-ha-derech lehaskir rechev le'acher she-ya'aseh bo melachto hu atzmo.” There is no concern that people will say he hired the non-Jew to do his work in the car, because it is normal to rent a car to someone so that the renter can use it for his own work.
Therefore, it is permitted for a Jew to rent a taxi to a non-Jew. Dehavya has a taxi; it says Dehavya on it. Give it to the non-Jew. “Ve-ha-goy oved bah beShabbat, ve-ein lachush le-mar'it ayin she-yomru she-ha-goy sachir shel Yisrael, keivan she-ha-derech lehaskir monit le'acher, velo liscor adam kifo'el la'avod bah.” You aren’t hiring the person; you are renting him the car.
“Lefi mah shenitba'er samuch al divrei haMishnah Berurah, me'ikar ha-din ein tzarich lehakpid be-ofen zeh she-tihiyeh sechirut ha-rechev be-havla'ah, ve-yachol lehaskir le-goy et ha-rechev lemeshech haShabbat bilvad.” According to what was explained above from the Mishnah Berurah, according to the strict law one does not have to make the car rental include other days; one can rent it to a non-Jew just for Shabbat. Whoa, we have to look at that.
“Ha-machmir lehaskir et ha-rechev le-goy be-havla'ah, de-hainu she-maskir lo et ha-rechev le-kamah sha'ot kodem haShabbat ule'achareha, tavo alav berachah.” One who is stringent and rents the car to the non-Jew with the payment included in a larger rental—for several hours before and after Shabbat—will be blessed. But how can he rent it just for Shabbat if the ruling says he does not have to include other days? That we’ll have to see in se'if katan alef of the Mishnah Berurah, which we haven’t reached yet.
Continue. “Yisrael she-yesh lo chevrah… chevrah le-hashkarat telefonim… machshirei chashmal o machshirim… machshirim refu'iyim… vechayozei, mutar lehaskir le-goy otam machshirim va'afilu be'erev Shabbat, ve-gam im ha-socher meshalem lefi midat ha-shimush beShabbat, yesh lehatir.” A Jew who owns a company that rents telephones, electronic devices, medical devices, and similar things may rent those devices to a non-Jew, even on Friday. It is also permitted if the renter pays according to how much he uses them on Shabbat.
Wow, so you could pay according to usage. On a phone, they charge by usage, and the person is using it on Shabbat. They may say it is included with the other days, but it isn’t, because that day’s use is charged that day. We have to see the basis for this leniency about receiving payment for Shabbat.
“Kemo asur lehaskir traktor le-goy.” It is forbidden to rent a tractor to a non-Jew if the company’s name appears on it. Why is that forbidden? “Mipenei she-ka'asher ya'aseh ha-goy melachah ba-traktor beShabbat, yachshiduhu she-oved avur ha-Yisrael.” People will suspect that the non-Jew is working for the Jew. “Im ha-derech al pi rov she-nahag ha-traktor hu sachir shel ha-chevrah atzmah.” If the usual practice is that the tractor driver is an employee of the company itself, then that is the concern. I guess they don’t usually rent out tractors. That van—if you rent out a van... A van’s okay. Taxis are more commonly rented out than a tractor. “No, but a van that’s used, that’s not rented...” “Taxis are common in a big car.” You have to know the real-world practice. If that is the practice, it is permitted; if not, it is forbidden.
“Ve-chen asur lehaskir otobus le-goy, im shem ha-chevrah shel Yisrael mofi'a alav, im ha-derech lehaskir otobus im ha-nahag, she-az yachshiduhu she-ha-goy sachir yom shelo.” It is also forbidden to rent a bus to a non-Jew if the Jewish company’s name appears on it, if the usual practice is to rent the bus with a driver. Then people will suspect that the non-Jew is the Jew’s day laborer.
“So the Montreal guy wants to know.” “Montreal guy!” That may be different with Uhur’s van, because he may not rent it out. “No, they don’t rent that out.” Then that would be forbidden because of mar'it ayin. But buses are rented, so you have to know what the usual practice is.
“She-ein anu metzuvim al shevitat kelim. Ve-chen ikar, ve-delo kehaRoke'ach she-hechmir bazeh. She-le-inyan ma'aseh ein lanu ela divrei rov ha-poskim, u-kefesak ba'alei haShulchan Aruch.” The main ruling is that we are not commanded regarding the resting of utensils, unlike the Roke’ach, who was stringent. In practice, we follow the majority of authorities and the ruling of the authors of the Shulchan Aruch.
“Kaf Hachayim siyem bedivrei haBach she-katav she-kol yere Shamayim yachmir le'atzmo ke-da'at haRoke'ach.” Kaf Hachayim concluded with the Bach’s words that anyone who fears Heaven should be stringent for himself according to the Roke’ach. What? You shouldn’t let your utensils work on Shabbat? Wow. Kaf Hachayim says that a person should be stringent for himself.
“Ela she-ein lehorot isur la'acherim keneged rov ha-poskim, ve-Halachah Berurah katav she-ein lachush le-isur shevitat kelim, ve-ravcha beyadeinu she-ein adam metzuveh al shevitat kelav kelal.” But one should not instruct others that it is forbidden, against the majority of authorities. Halachah Berurah wrote that there is no need to be concerned about a prohibition of shevitat kelim. We have room to rely on the view that a person is not commanded at all regarding the resting of his utensils. Leave it; don’t worry about it. That is an important point when you want to put a timer on your utensils on Shabbat, because shevitat kelim could be a problem.
“U-mutar leha'amid bi-reshut ha-rabbim mechonot otomat…” It is permitted to place automatic machines in the public domain, such as soda and candy machines, selling food and drink and similar products, and non-Jews buy from them on Shabbat; there is no concern about that. Okay, that was it. The main thing we have to see now is havla'ah. “Time?” “Five minutes.” Go one more, because here is the issue of havla'ah.
“Mikol makom, gam hem sevira lehu de-sechar ha-kelim ein heiter lehaskir ela be-havla'ah.” Even they hold that payment for utensils may be received only when included in a larger payment. Everybody is lenient only if it is through havla'ah.
Look what he says: “Ve-chen katav be-Kaf Hachayim, aval ha-Mateh Yehudah katav she-da'at haRambam de-lika be-chai gavna mishum sechar Shabbat, keivan de-sechirut leyomeih memkar hu, ve-havei ha-keli kemo shel ha-goy.” The Mateh Yehudah wrote that according to the Rambam there is no issue of Shabbat wages in this kind of case, because a rental for a day is like a sale for that day, and the utensil is like the non-Jew’s property.
Wow! Renting a utensil is like selling it to him for that day. That’s a find. Is that what it is? It’s as if I sold it to him for that day. “U-mah she-katav be-Shulchan Aruch, u-vilvad shelo yitol sechar Shabbat…” So why did Maran say the payment must be included in a larger payment? “Hu rak le-da'at ha-yesh omrim.” That applies only according to the yesh omrim, Rabeinu Yonah.
“Mah she-ein ken bi-sechar po'el lishmor et ha-parah o ha-zer'im,” when you hire a worker to watch the cow or the crops. He is not merely a watchman; he is working for the owners and is told to guard them. In that case, taking Shabbat wages is a problem. The requirement of havla'ah is only according to the second view.
Whoa. So you’re saying you don’t even have to use havla'ah? If this is true, according to the Mateh Yehudah, I can rent it to him for Shabbat itself, without havla'ah. Why? Because it is as if the utensil is his. I gave him a utensil; for that day it is his, as if I sold it to him. That is a big chiddush, if this Mateh Yehudah is correct.
What if you sell something on Friday and it is delivered to the person on Shabbat? You’re receiving the benefit of the money right away, but if he receives the item on Shabbat, don’t you get some benefit from that? We’ll see all these cases. These are exactly the cases we need to examine.
Maran knew it this way? “Maran—yes, you just said.” “That’s how I thought you read it earlier.” “I thought the havla'ah at the beginning applied to…” That applies to the yesh omrim, because you read the Aruch Hashulchan first. “Everywhere we saw that…” Right, you got blinded by the Aruch Hashulchan. “Everybody told me everyone holds it’s forbidden. Havla'ah, whatever, it’s forbidden. The Mishnah Berurah said the same thing.” We didn’t think of that. Havla'ah is only according to those views. According to the Rambam, he wasn’t concerned about havla'ah, because I gave it to him; I sold it to him.
So that is going to be the basis for permitting cellphones and all these things: bottom line, it is his phone. I’m not renting him a service; that day, I sold it to him for that day. So it is like Shabbat wages, and all the other Torah on this subject. Beautiful. Tomorrow we’ll continue, rabotai. That is halachah alef. We’ll do Halachah Berurah, and then we’ll go to halachah bet.
Baruch Hashem le'olam (Blessed is Hashem forever), amen ve'amen.
Beautiful. You know, in Acapulco there used to be a guy who rented Jeeps. His name was all over the Jeep. “Jewish guy?” “Yeah, SY guy from Mexico.”