The Use of Electricity on Shabbat

Minchat Shlomo 1:9

But it seems that since the prohibition of creation is only because it seems to be creating something new, therefore it's just if we really do create something new like putting out a fire, the spark that comes out is completely new, or even crushing snow also looks like something new - it started as snow and is now water.

Therefore, it is forbidden in every matter, which is not the case in the case of turning over a cup of perfume. That which looks like something new was only because of the change of the garment and it suddenly began to smell. In this kind of case, it seems possible that only in something that is not unique to the smell, does it appear to be something new and forbidden, This is not the case if the garment is special and is made for it, since it is not possible that it seems like anything new... If one is always accustomed to creating and returning and re-creating the same thing that has already been created before and thus it will be used frequently, it seems that it does not belong to the prohibition of Molid.

It is also possible that the prohibition of Molid is when a thing that is sustainable is born. And what gives birth to the smell is considered Molid, even though the smell goes and dispeserses because it was from something spoiled, And so too through the creation and the birth of fire, that is not the case because the creation is for a short time and soon after finishing use he repeats the current... and then again and again he opens and close, such a thing is not at all considered Molid.

Minchat Shlomo 1:9

The Chazon Ish writes: "It is also [forbidden] because of repairing, since it makes it possible for the current to constantly flow, which is like Boneh in the Torah. Even more so here, where all the wires are connected to the house and was created attached. This is not [forbidden] because of building with tool, but rather because of building and destroying...

Moreover, I heard the name of the Chazon Ish that even when there is no current in the wires and when the person presses the button we do not do anything yet, in any event, the very closing of the circuit to be completed and ready for a electricity that will then be done at another time, this is also considered this constructive ...

And since it was strange to me, I turned to him in a letter in which I briefly commented that in my opinion operating current isn't Boneh. It is closer to connecting a wick with the oil of a candle in order to light, or using a stream of water or wind to rotate and make movement without doing any work. And also because pressing the button to open or close a circuit is easy to do frequently, therefore even when connected it is only called "use" and not "building".

Minchat Shlomo 1:9

I explained elsewhere that this is not included in setting a clock and similar cases, that many believe is forbidden because of repairing [Boneh] and Makeh B'Patish. It's different there since the main part of repairing the clock is to always be ready and show the time, and therefore each time it stops it is considered broken. And every time he corrects it, it is considered fixing.

What isn't the case here is that the engine running is considered fixed and the engine not running is considered broken. Just as they are used in times of need, they aren't used when they aren't needed. And more so, if you continue to use it constantly, there is no breakdown. Therefore one should think of using it [electrical appliances] as "using" a tool, as opposed to "fixing" an instrument.

Minchat Shlomo 1:9

And it's also learned in Gemara Shabbat and from Poskim that Makeh B'Patish is only in the case that work is actually completed. And it's also apparent that the importance of an action isn't dependent on it's result. An action is important or not important because it requires great effort to do or it remains forever. And here, in the introduction of a current, even thought the result is very important, in any case since it is already prepared and proper and the main action is easy to do and it does not exist forever and it is normal to do it at any time, it does not seem to be Makeh B'Patish

Minchat Shlomo 1:9

"You shall cast iron on stone, and the like, and they shall bring out sparks to light it." This is not explained as Mavir unless the sparks cause something to light, not if it merely sparks. This is a big thing and it is difficult to rely on it for Mavir in the Torah and it's also possible that this was written for Yom Tov only.

And if he takes two stones and hit them together until they create fire, as the Adam did on Saturday night, it may be Mavir, because he explicitly intended to make a spark in order to enjoy light or to light another fire. Therefore it's possible to understand it this way and he is liable for Mavir because of the sparks and Mavir is on all [sparks], because all fire is important.

Which is not the case in our case, which deals with something else, but in any case a small spark emerges, which at the time they cannot enjoy.

Just like Maimonides believes that heating metal is Mavir, since we heated it so much that it's considered fire, we can also say that one spark is so small that a human hand can't feel any heat, so it isn't considered fire. And even though the spark is able to burn things that are sensitive to fire, in any event, since the hand is not burnt nor does it feel any heat, it's not considered fire at all.

Minchat Shlomo 1:12

The Chazon Ish wrote according to the Raavad that even if it wasn't your intention to attach or soften the metal, in any case it is forbidden because of Bishul. Therefore, he [Chazon Ish] writes "From that we learn that lighting an electric candle on Shabbat from heating the metal is Bishul even if it wasn't intended and doesn't benefit you and is forbidden. It is possible that the heating of the wire is needed for transferring the current and does benefit you. And this is all if the wire is hot enough that you will pull your hand away."

And I didn't understand what that meant. Surely, there must be a great need in heating, so the wire will heat until it glows, or cooks, or whitens, or emits light. And because of that, they surely need the heating, because if the wire had remained cold then it would have burned and disconnected. And only because the wire heats up and the resistance is enlarged, the current through the wire is not too big and the wire doesn't disconnect.

And he [Chazon Ish / Raavad] wrote "the heat is need for transfering the current in the wire", but after all they need the heat so that the wire is warm or to cook or to emit light. But according to the Raavad the main issue is the softening of the wire. And from now if we say that in electric lights he is considered to be softening the wire, in any case this doesn't benefit me. After all, the softening only causes damage and loss to the wire. (One should not take into account that the wire inside the lamp softens slightly, since after it turns off it returns to how it was and the light doesn't do anything to make us think about this and no-one feels it.)

And when he [Chazon Ish] wrote "And this is all if the wire is hot enough that you will pull your hand away.", I did not understand. The Meiri used an electric candle, and how is it possible that he didn't pull his hand away? It's simple. Your hand needs to burn and it burns from heat.

Minchat Shlomo 1:9

But mainly, it seems to me that there is no prohibition against using electricity on Shabbat, but rather because of the result done by electricity such as cooking and lighting, etc.., which is considered as if we cooked or lit ourselves.