Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Is it ever permissible to break Shabbos in order to relieve someone (a human or an animal) of suffering? I am talking about excruciating suffering, not merely discomfort, and I am not talking about situations in which human life would be saved at the same time.

I am interested in to what extent Shabbos could be broken in such a situation--for example, minhag, chumras, Rabbinical prohibitions, more?

Please assume no Gentile is available to relieve the suffering.

share|improve this question
    
See MB 328:57. – msh210 Mar 10 '13 at 16:59
1  
Re. animals, see N'mukei Yosef (Bava M'tzi'a 17b): משום צער בעלי חיים. פסקו הגאונים ז"ל ורב אלפס ז"ל כרבא דאמר צער בעלי חיים דאורייתא והכי מוכח בפרק מפנין (דף קכח ב) דשרינן בטול כלי מהיכנו דרבנן משום צער בעלי חיים דאורייתא ומיהו דוקא בצער גדול אבל צער מועט לא דתנן בפרק משילין (דף לז א) גבי אותו ואת בנו שנפלו לבור דלא שרינן ליה להעלותו אלא יעשה לו פרנסה במקומו דלאו צער הוא כולי האי – Fred Mar 10 '13 at 17:22
    
@Fred could you (or someone) summarize this in English? Sorry for my ignorance. – SAH Mar 10 '13 at 17:24
    
@Fred Thanks!.. – SAH Mar 10 '13 at 17:26
1  
@SAH I made an error in my above comment (that I just deleted); he says that you can violate a d'rabbanan in general for an animal in great distress (bittul k'li meiheichano is soseir d'rabbanan, not a violation of muktzah). The citation from the gemara in Shabbos (128b) is: סבר מבטל כלי מהיכנו דרבנן צער בעלי חיים דאורייתא ואתי דאורייתא ודחי דרבנן (He holds that making a k'li muktza is a rabbinic prohibition and that cruelty to animals is a biblical prohibition, and a d'oraysa overrides a d'rabbanan). – Fred Mar 10 '13 at 17:32
up vote 3 down vote accepted

it seams that the shulchan aruch harav summaries these laws like this

328.19

to relieve a human of suffering if no Gentile is available

if the he is so sick that he fell because of it into laying (due to his sickness he needs to lye down) or he has an ache that is so painful that his whole body became weak (even though he is walking he is considered laying) ... a jew can "break (shabos)" for him Rabbinical prohibitions if with a shinui (doing it unusually) not excluding medicine

328.20

if he did not fall laying and it is not causing his whole body to became weak but he has big pain

a jew can do for him Rabbinical prohibitions if with a shinui excluding the prohibition of eating foods that it is recognizable that they are for healing (i.e. medicine) (but it is forbidden to feed him medicine)

if he is only a little sick a jew is not permitted to do anything that is usually forbidden *

concerning to relieve an animal of suffering if no Gentile is available

332

  1. you are not allowed to help it give birth at all

  2. to take care of a wound you can only toil to help it with pain but for it to have pleasure no

  3. their is no prohibition of medicine (i.e. feeding it foods that it is recognizable that they are for healing) by animals since he is not so nervous about it to do a biblicaly prohibited work

share|improve this answer
    
So it still sounds like violating a d'oraysa for suffering is never possible... – SAH Dec 3 '15 at 22:33

Discussed here about the case of an animal--and not even necessarily in a case of excruciating suffering. A fortiori, if it were a human suffering, or an animal suffering badly, I imagine we could do at least as much as is suggested here:

a) Is a Jew permitted to violate a Torah or Rabbinic prohibition for the sake of ‘tza’ar ba’alei chaim’– lit. “(Alleviating) the pain of an animal” – which, according to many opinions, is a Torah precept (Heb. ‘d’oraisa’)? b) If a Jew is not permitted to violate, is he permitted to ask a non-Jew to do it for him?

To address these questions, we can reference Hilchos Shabbos, as the same halachos apply here. We excerpt from MBY Archives 305:18-20 Allowing one’s animal to rest (part 3) – Hey, that’s a (black) hat trick! “The solution is to milk in such a way that only a rabbinically-forbidden act is done, which will be overridden by the principle of ‘tza’ar ba’alei chaim d’oaraisa’. Here are the options for doing that, in order of halachic preference: a) Have a non-Jew express the milk to go to waste or to go directly from the animal into a solid food. (Note: The former is not a Torah-prohibited act, because the intended purpose of ‘mefareik’ – i.e. extracting the milk for its consumption - is not realized; the latter is not technically the melacha of ‘mefareik’ either, because, since the liquid is transferred directly back into a solid, the act of “extracting liquid from solid” is not accomplished.) In this way, only a ‘shvus d’shvus’ – i.e. one rabbinic prohibition, namely instructing a non-Jew to do another rabbinic prohibition (non-melacha milking) is being done! b) The Jew himself may express the milk in one of the rabbinically-prohibited methods mentioned above. As stated above, when necessary, a rabbinic law may be overridden for the sake of ‘tza’ar ba’alei chaim’. c) Have a non-Jew milk the animal in the normal way – i.e. collecting the liquid milk in a container. Although the milking method is a melacha, having the non-Jew doing it (which is a rabbinic prohibition) is permissible for the sake of ‘tza’ar ba’alei chaim’.

share|improve this answer
    
+1 nice link, but See the source in my answer that your A fortiori is incorrect (we are more strict by humans (since it is harder to control yourself)), how did you decide that this is not a case of excruciating suffering? – hazoriz May 6 at 11:01
    
@hazoriz Are you saying that the laws would be stricter or less strict with regards to humans? – SAH May 10 at 8:13
    
@hazoriz Re: excruciating suffering -- not sure – SAH May 10 at 8:15
    
Yes (see my answer for source) – hazoriz May 12 at 8:44

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.