11

Psik Reishei refers to an inevitable consequence of an action. Literally "cutting off its head", the original example (see Rambam Shabbos 1:6) is someone who wants to give his child a chicken head to play with on Shabbos (don't ask, I guess they did those things back then). The problem is killing a chicken on Shabbos is forbidden. Now, on Shabbos it is ...


3

As mentioned in the comments פסיק רישא דלא ניחא ליה is probably equivalent to פסיק רישא דלא איכפת ליה. The Big Question is regular פסיק רישא vs. מלאכה שאינה צריכה לגופה Background There is double machlokes that comes up between R.Shimon and R. Yehuda. R.Shimon holds "דבר שאינו מתכוון is muttar (Beitza 2:10), while R.Yehuda holds its assur. R. Shimon holds ...


3

Rav Nachum Rabinovitch, shlit"a, (who holds electricity is only, at worst, an issue of uvda d'chol [weekday activity] has ruled allowing the use of hotel key cards even when they trigger an LED (see here). Your scenario would seem to be even less of an issue. (I believe he has also accordingly allowed the use of baby monitors even where an LED indicates ...


3

An excerpt from the source you linked: Dvar sheina mitchaven: Doing a permitted action in a way in which one doesn’t intend for a melacha to occur as a byproduct of one’s intended action is considered a dvar sheina mitchaven. Nonetheless, when it is inevitable that amelacha will take place as a result of one’s ...


2

There is a Machlokes Between the Aruch (Rav Nosson MiRoma 11th century among other rishonim) and Ri (Rabbeinu Yitzchak MiDanpierre 12th century among other Rishonim) in Tosfos throughout Shas whether פסיק רישא דלא ניחא is permitted on Shabbos or not, see Tosfos Shabbos 103a "Lo tzricha". Loosely translated as "one who causes a Melacha to be transgressed ...


1

The berayta and gemarot (Nazir 46b, Yuma 61b) regarding Nazir Memurat seem address a case in which hair loss is not a case of shaving, Gemara doesn't ask if the situation is induced. Similarly for a metsora without behonot, there is no distinction between accident and self mutilation. All the cases of hairs cutting in gemara are active cutting, including ...


1

I based this off one of the Aharonim I just don't remember right now which Aharon (I think it was the Rashash Ketuvot 6a). By Melacha Sheen Sarich Legufa: the actual action is a Melacha even if you don't want to do the Melacha it is inevidble because the action itself is a Melacha. By Pesik Reshe Delo Niha Le: The action itself isnt a Melacha but there is ...


1

In Hilchos Shabbos 1:7 of the Mishnah Torah, The Kesef Mishna brings HaRav Avraham Hachasid (Rambam's son) and explains psik reisha doesn't need the actual melacha, he brings the case of closing a door on a deer.By melacha shaina tzricha it is the melacha you want but not its purpose, ayin sham.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible