Contact Us

Shulchan Aruch: Chapter 244 - Which Labors May Be Performed by a Non-Jew for Sake of a Jew

Shulchan Aruch: Chapter 244 - Which Labors May Be Performed by a Non-Jew for Sake of a Jew

Show content in:

SECTION 244 Which Labors May Be Performed by a Non-Jew for the Sake of a Jew (1-22)

סימן רמד אֵיזוֹ מְלָאכוֹת יָכוֹל הַנָּכְרִי לַעֲשׂוֹת בְּעַד הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל וּבוֹ כ"ב סְעִיפִים:

1 It is forbidden [for a Jew] to allow a non-Jew to perform a forbidden labor for him on Shabbos. [This applies] even if [the non-Jew] is working [primarily] for [his own] wages, but he is hired as a day-worker, e.g., the Jew hired him before Shabbos and told him: “For every day that you will work for me, I will give you this-and-this sum.” Although [the Jewish employer] did not explicitly tell him to work on Shabbos as well, but rather, he performed the labor [on Shabbos] on his own initiative, [the Jewish employer] must admonish him, as explained in sec. 243[:4].1

If, however, the non-Jew acts as a contractor (kablan), i.e., he agrees to perform a specific task for a specific fee, it is permitted to allow him to perform his entire task on Shabbos.2[License is granted] whether [the non-Jew] works with his own [materials] or with materials provided to him by the Jewish [employer] to perform the task,3 e.g., he gave him a garment to sew and set a fee [for sewing the garment], or provided him with strands of fabric to weave a garment. [In the latter instance, license is granted for the non-Jew] to perform the entire task on Shabbos whether he agreed to weave the entire garment [and he set a fee for performing that task] or whether he never agreed to weave the entire garment and [the employer] set a fee for every cubit he will weave.

It is permissible, even as an initial preference, to give [the non-Jew] the work on Friday, even shortly before nightfall, in the manner to be described in sec. 252[:4. This is true] even if [the Jewish employer] knows that the non-Jew will perform the task on Shabbos (and [moreover, the Jewish employer] desires that he do so).4 Nevertheless, the non-Jew is not acting for the benefit of the Jewish [employer], but for his own sake, hurrying to complete his work so that he will receive his fee.5

[These terms of employment] differ from the [hiring] of a day-worker, [which is prohibited] because the work a day-worker performs does not belong to him.6 It is not his concern; when working, he does not have the intent to complete the task, for the completion of the task is not his responsibility, and he derives no benefit from its completion. Instead, his intent is to work for the Jewish employer throughout the entire day so that he will be paid his [day’s] wage. Therefore, he is considered to be acting as the Jew’s agent. With regard to a contractor, by contrast, the work is his.7 His intent when working is to complete the task so that he will receive his fee. [Thus,] he is not considered as the Jew’s agent.

Nevertheless, one should be careful that [the non-Jewish contractor] not perform the task on any premises belonging to the Jewish [employer].8 Also, [the Jewish employer] should not instruct him to perform the task on Shabbos.9 He must also establish a price with [the non-Jewish contractor] before Shabbos.10Also, [the Jewish employer] may not give him [the task to perform] unless the non-Jew could complete the entire task during the week, should he so desire, whether before the commencement of the Shabbos or [during the weekdays] afterward,11 as will be explained in sec. 252[:4ff.]. Consult that source for all the relevant laws.

א אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָסוּר לְהַנִּיחַ לְנָכְרִי שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה מְלָאכָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל בְּשַׁבָּת אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁעוֹשֶׂה בְּשָׂכָר אִם הוּא עוֹשֶׂה בְּתוֹרַת שְׂכִיר יוֹם כְּגוֹן שֶׁשְּׂכָרוֹ הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל קֹדֶם הַשַּׁבָּת וְאָמַר לוֹ בְּעַד כָּל יוֹם וְיוֹם שֶׁתַּעֲבוֹד לִי אֶתֵּן לְךָ כָּךְ וְכָךְ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא אָמַר לוֹ שֶׁיַּעֲבוֹד גַּם בְּשַׁבָּת אֶלָּא מֵעַצְמוֹ הוּא עוֹבֵד צָרִיךְ הוּא לִמְחוֹת בְּיָדוֹ כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן רמ"ג א,1 אֲבָל אִם הוּא עוֹשֶׂה בְּתוֹרַת קַבְּלָנוּת שֶׁקִּבֵּל עָלָיו לַעֲשׂוֹת כָּךְ וְכָךְ בְּעַד שָׂכָר כָּךְ וְכָךְ ב בֵּין שֶׁעוֹשֶׂה מִשֶּׁלּוֹ בֵּין שֶׁעוֹשֶׂה מִשֶּׁל הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁנָּתַן לוֹ מִמָּה לַעֲשׂוֹת הַמְּלָאכָה ג,3 כְּגוֹן שֶׁנָּתַן לוֹ בֶּגֶד לִתְפּוֹר וְקָצַץ לוֹ שָׂכָר ד אוֹ שֶׁנָּתַן לוֹ חוּטִין לֶאֱרוֹג לוֹ בֶּגֶד בֵּין שֶׁקִּבֵּל עָלָיו לֶאֱרוֹג כָּל הַבֶּגֶד בֵּין שֶׁלֹּא קִבֵּל עָלָיו כְּלָל לֶאֱרוֹג כָּל הַבֶּגֶד אֶלָּא שֶׁקָּצַץ לוֹ בְּעַד כָּל אַמָּה וְאַמָּה שֶׁיֶּאֱרוֹג ה מֻתָּר לְהַנִּיחוֹ שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה כָּל מְלַאכְתּוֹ בְּשַׁבָּת וַאֲפִלּוּ לְכַתְּחִלָּה מֻתָּר לִתֵּן לוֹ אֲפִלּוּ בְּעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת סָמוּךְ לַחֲשֵׁכָה ו עַל דֶּרֶךְ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן רנ"ב ז אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיּוֹדֵעַ שֶׁהַנָּכְרִי יַעֲשֶׂה בְּשַׁבָּת (א) (וּבְכָךְ הוּא חָפֵץ ח)4 מִכָּל מָקוֹם הַנָּכְרִי אֵינוֹ עוֹשֶׂה בִּשְׁבִיל טוֹבַת הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל אֶלָּא בִּשְׁבִיל עַצְמוֹ ט לְמַהֵר לְהַשְׁלִים מְלַאכְתּוֹי כְּדֵי לְקַבֵּל שְׂכָרוֹ.יא,5

וְאֵינוֹ דוֹמֶה לִשְׂכִיר יוֹם יב שֶׁהַשְּׂכִיר יוֹם אֵין הַמְּלָאכָה שֶׁלּוֹ6 כְּלָל וְאֵין לוֹ עֵסֶק בָּהּ שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵין כַּוָּנָתוֹ בַּעֲבוֹדָתוֹ כְּדֵי לְהַשְׁלִים הַמְּלָאכָה שֶׁהֲרֵי לֹא עָלָיו הַמְּלָאכָה לִגְמוֹר וְאֵין לוֹ תּוֹעֶלֶת כְּלָל בְּהִגָּמְרָהּ אֶלָּא כַּוָּנָתוֹ לַעֲבוֹד אֶת הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל כָּל הַיּוֹם כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּתֵּן לוֹ שְׂכָרוֹ לְפִיכָךְ הֲרֵי זֶה כְּעוֹשֶׂה שְׁלִיחוּת הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל אֲבָל הַקַּבְּלָן הַמְּלָאכָה הִיא שֶׁלּוֹ יג,7 שֶׁכַּוָּנָתוֹ בַּעֲבוֹדָתוֹ הִיא לְהַשְׁלִים הַמְּלָאכָה כְּדֵי לִטּוֹל שְׂכָרוֹ וְאֵינוֹ כִּשְׁלוּחוֹ שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל.

וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם צָרִיךְ לִזָּהֵר שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲשֶׂה בְּבֵית הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל יד,8 וְשֶׁלֹּא יֹאמַר לוֹ שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה בְּשַׁבָּת טו,9 וְגַם שֶׁיִּקְצוֹץ לוֹ דָּמִים טז קֹדֶם הַשַּׁבָּת10 וְגַם שֶׁלֹּא יִתֵּן לוֹ אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן בָּעִנְיָן שֶׁיּוּכַל הַנָּכְרִי לַעֲשׂוֹת כָּל הַמְּלָאכָה בְּחֹל אִם יִרְצֶה קֹדֶם הַשַּׁבָּת אוֹ לְאַחֲרָיו11 כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן רנ"ב יז עַיֵּן שָׁם כָּל פְּרָטֵי דִינִים אֵלּוּ:

2When is license given to allow a non-Jewish contractor to perform a task on Shabbos? When he performs the task with an entity that is not attached to the ground,12 so that the non-Jew could perform it in his home or in another place that was not the domain of the Jew.13 [Thus,] it would not be evident that the task belonged to the Jew and there is no question of the impression that would be created. [Different laws apply,] however, when [the non-Jew] is working with something that is connected to the ground, e.g., he was contracted to build a house for a Jew or harvest a field for a Jew.14 [In these instances,] since it is apparent and commonly known that the property belongs to the Jewish [employer], it is evident to any observer that the task is also being performed for his sake. Therefore, if [the property] is in the middle of a town or within the town’s Shabbos limits,15 [the Jewish employer] is forbidden to allow [the non-Jew] to perform the task on Shabbos, because of the impression that it would create. For an observer would say that [the non-Jew] is a day-worker hired by the Jewish [employer].

Even if it is not common knowledge that the property belongs to the Jewish [employer], nevertheless, the impression the neighbors might get is of concern. They16 know that the property belongs to the Jewish [employer], but do not know that the non-Jew who performs the work is a contractor. Instead, they may say that he is a day-worker. [Allowing the non-Jew to perform the work is prohibited] even if [the Jewish employer] lives in a village among non-Jews with no Jewish neighbors. Nevertheless, if [the non-Jew] carries out the task within the Shabbos limits of the village, there is a basis for concern, for it is possible that guests will spend the Shabbos with [the Jewish employer], see the non-Jew performing tasks on Shabbos on land belonging to their host, and suspect that the non-Jew was hired as a day-worker. Furthermore, there is reason for concern about [the impression that] the members of [the Jewish employer’s] household may get, for they know that the task is being performed for his sake and [may] suspect that the non-Jew was hired as a day-worker. [Allowing the non-Jew to perform such tasks is therefore prohibited.]

When, by contrast, the non-Jew is working with an entity that is not attached to the ground, even when some Jews know that the work is being performed for his sake, the Sages did not issue any decrees [concerning it], because in the majority of cases, it is not at all known to people at large [that the work is for the Jew’s sake], for [generally,] work performed on something detached does not become public knowledge.17

This, by contrast, is not the case when [the non-Jew] works on something attached to the ground in a visible and well-known place. In the majority of such cases, it is apparent and well known [that the work is being performed for the Jew’s sake], because work performed on something attached is a matter of public knowledge. Therefore, even in instances where the concern is only about the impression a minimal number of Jews might get, our Sages [still] issued a decree.

ב בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים שֶׁמֻּתָּר לְהַנִּיחַ לְקַבְּלָן נָכְרִי לַעֲשׂוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת כְּשֶׁעוֹשֶׂה מְלָאכָה בְּדָבָר הַתָּלוּשׁ מִן הַקַּרְקַע יח,12 שֶׁהַנָּכְרִי יָכוֹל לַעֲשׂוֹתָהּ בְּבֵיתוֹ יט אוֹ בְּמָקוֹם אַחֵר כ שֶׁאֵינוֹ רְשׁוּת הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל,13 וְאֵין הַדָּבָר נִכָּר שֶׁהִיא מְלֶאכֶת הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל וְאֵין כַּאן חֲשַׁשׁ מַרְאִית הָעַיִן כא אֲבָל כְּשֶׁעוֹשֶׂה בִּמְחֻבָּר לַקַּרְקַע כְּגוֹן שֶׁקִּבֵּל עָלָיו לִבְנוֹת בַּיִת לְיִשְׂרָאֵל כב אוֹ לִקְצוֹר שָׂדֶה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל כג,14 כֵּיוָן שֶׁהַקַּרְקַע גְּלוּיָה וּמְפֻרְסֶמֶת לַכֹּל שֶׁהִיא שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל נִכָּר הַדָּבָר לְכָל רוֹאֶה שֶׁגַּם הַמְּלָאכָה הִיא שֶׁל הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל כד לְפִיכָךְ אִם הוּא בְּתוֹךְ הָעִיר אוֹ בְּתוֹךְ תְּחוּמָהּ15 אָסוּר לְהַנִּיחוֹ שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה בְּשַׁבָּת מִפְּנֵי מַרְאִית הָעַיִן כה שֶׁהָרוֹאֶה יֹאמַר שֶׁהוּא שְׂכִיר יוֹם אֵצֶל הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל. כו

וַאֲפִלּוּ אִם אֵין הַדָּבָר מְפֻרְסָם לַכֹּל שֶׁקַּרְקַע זוֹ הִיא שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל מִכָּל מָקוֹם יֵשׁ לָחוּשׁ לְמַרְאִית הָעַיִן שֶׁל שְׁכֵנָיו שֶׁהֵם16 יוֹדְעִים שֶׁקַּרְקַע זוֹ הִיא שֶׁלּוֹ וְאֵינָן יוֹדְעִים שֶׁהַנָּכְרִִי הָעוֹסֵק בִּמְלָאכָה הוּא קַבְּלָן אֶלָּא יֹאמְרוּ שֶׁהוּא שְׂכִיר יוֹם כז וַאֲפִלּוּ אִם הוּא דָר בִּכְפָר בֵּין הַנָּכְרִים שֶׁאֵין לוֹ שָׁם שְׁכֵנִים יִשְׂרָאֵל מִכָּל מָקוֹם אִם עוֹשֶׂה בְּתוֹךְ תְּחוּם הַכְּפָר יֵשׁ לָחוּשׁ שֶׁמָּא יִזְדַּמְּנוּ לוֹ שָׁם אוֹרְחִים שֶׁיִּשְׁבְּתוּ אֶצְלוֹ כח וְיִרְאוּ אֶת הַנָּכְרִי עוֹסֵק בְּשַׁבָּת בְּקַרְקַע הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל וְיַחְשְׁדוּהוּ שֶׁהַנָּכְרִי שְׂכִיר יוֹם אֶצְלוֹ וְגַם יֵשׁ לָחוּשׁ לִבְנֵי בֵיתוֹ שֶׁהֵם יוֹדְעִים שֶׁהַמְּלָאכָה הִיא שֶׁלּוֹ וְיַחְשְׁדוּ אוֹתוֹ שֶׁהַנָּכְרִי הוּא שְׂכִיר יוֹם אֶצְלוֹ. כט

אֲבָל כְּשֶׁעוֹשֶׂה בְּדָבָר תָּלוּשׁ (ב) אַף שֶׁמִּקְצָת יִשְׂרָאֵל יוֹדְעִים שֶׁהַמְּלָאכָה הִיא שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא גָזְרוּ חֲכָמִים ל כֵּיוָן שֶׁרֹב הַפְּעָמִים אֵין הַדָּבָר נוֹדָע לַאֲחֵרִים כְּלָל שֶׁמְּלֶאכֶת תָּלוּשׁ אֵין לָהּ קוֹל כְּלָל לא,17 מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן כְּשֶׁעוֹשֶׂה בִּמְחֻבָּר שֶׁהוּא בְּמָקוֹם גָּלוּי וּמְפֻרְסָם17 וְרֹב הַפְּעָמִים הַמְּלָאכָה גְּלוּיָה וּמְפֻרְסֶמֶת לָרַבִּים שֶׁמְּלֶאכֶת מְחֻבָּר יֵשׁ לָהּ קוֹל לְפִיכָךְ אִם לִפְעָמִים אֵין חֲשַׁשׁ מַרְאִית הָעַיִן אֶלָּא מִמִּקְצָת יִשְׂרָאֵל גָּזְרוּ חֲכָמִים:

3 The above applies only when the task is performed in the middle of a town or within its Shabbos limits, and thus the inhabitants of the town may walk there on Shabbos. When, however, [the non-Jew] performs the task outside the town’s Shabbos limits, and there is no other town with Jewish inhabitants within the Shabbos limits of the place where the task is being performed, it is permitted to allow [the non-Jew] to perform the task on Shabbos.18

ג וְכָל זֶה כְּשֶׁעוֹשֶׂה הַמְּלָאכָה בְּתוֹךְ הָעִיר אוֹ בְּתוֹךְ תְּחוּם הָעִיר שֶׁיְּכוֹלִין אַנְשֵׁי הָעִיר לֵילֵךְ לְשָׁם בְּשַׁבָּת אֲבָל כְּשֶׁעוֹשֶׂה הַמְּלָאכָה חוּץ לַתְּחוּם וְגַם אֵין עִיר אַחֶרֶת שֶׁיִּשְׂרָאֵל דָּרִים בָּהּ תּוֹךְ תְּחוּמָיו שֶׁל מְקוֹם הַמְּלָאכָה מֻתָּר לְהַנִּיחוֹ שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה בְּשַׁבָּת: לב,18

4 Even when work is performed on something that is not attached to the ground, if it is well known and a matter of public knowledge that [the object or concern where the work is being performed] belongs to a Jew, and the labor is being performed in an open place that is in public view, it is forbidden to allow [a non-Jew] to carry out the task on Shabbos because of the impression that might be created. An example of this is building a ship, a task which is generally carried out on a riverbank, which is a public place.19

ד אֲפִלּוּ מְלֶאכֶת תָּלוּשׁ אִם הִיא מְפֻרְסֶמֶת וִידוּעָה לָרַבִּים שֶׁהִיא שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל וְהִיא נַעֲשֵׂית בְּמָקוֹם גָּלוּי וּמְפֻרְסָם לג כְּגוֹן בִּנְיַן הַסְּפִינָה שֶׁדֶּרֶךְ לִבְנוֹתָהּ עַל שְׂפַת הַנָּהָר שֶׁהוּא מְקוֹם פַּרְהֶסְיָא אָסוּר לְהַנִּיחוֹ לַעֲשׂוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת מִפְּנֵי מַרְאִית הָעַיִן: לד,19

5 In which situations does the above apply? With regard to a ship or the like, which is identified with the Jewish [employer], i.e., people will say that this project belongs to so-and-so.20 [Different laws apply,] in contrast, with regard to a matter that is not identified as belonging to the Jew, although [the task] is performed publicly and it becomes known to people at large that this task was performed on Shabbos for the sake of the Jewish [employer], e.g., a Jew hired a non-Jew as a contractor to make new articles for him, and [the non-Jew] fashioned them on Shabbos in a public place. Although it became a subject of discussion and public knowledge that [the non-Jew] performed [the task] for the Jew, nevertheless, the articles never became identified with the Jew. They were never called “so-and-so’s articles” because they never entered his domain. Therefore, even though [the non-Jew] performs the task in an open and public place, [still,] according to the letter of the law, the Jewish [employer] need not admonish him. Nevertheless, it is desirable [for the Jewish employer] to be stringent and admonish him [not to perform the labor on Shabbos], for he should be alert to the possibility of fleeting gossip about him,21 [i.e., people] saying that the non-Jew performed forbidden labor on Shabbos as his agent.

ה בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים (ג) בִּסְפִינָה וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָהּ מִדְּבָרִים שֶׁשֵּׁם הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל נִקְרָא עֲלֵיהֶם שֶׁאוֹמְרִים דָּבָר זֶה הוּא שֶׁל פְּלוֹנִי20 אֲבָל דָּבָר שֶׁאֵין שֵׁם הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל נִקְרָא עָלָיו רַק שֶׁעוֹשֶׂה בְּפַרְהֶסְיָא וְנִתְפַּרְסֵם לָרַבִּים שֶׁדָּבָר זֶה נַעֲשֶׂה בְּשַׁבָּת לְצֹרֶךְ הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל כְּגוֹן יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁשָּׂכַר לוֹ נָכְרִי בְּקַבְּלָנוּת לַעֲשׂוֹת לוֹ כֵּלִים חֲדָשִׁים וְעָשָׂה אוֹתָם בְּשַׁבָּת בְּפַרְהֶסְיָא שֶׁאַף שֶׁיָּצָא הַקּוֹל וְנִתְפַּרְסֵם לָרַבִּים שֶׁעוֹשֶׂה בִּשְׁבִיל הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל מִכָּל מָקוֹם עֲדַיִן לֹא נִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ עֲלֵיהֶם לִהְיוֹת נִקְרָאִים כֵּלִים שֶׁל פְּלוֹנִי כֵּיוָן שֶׁעֲדַיִן לֹא בָאוּ לִרְשׁוּתוֹ מֵעוֹלָם לְפִיכָךְ אַף שֶׁעוֹשֶׂה בְּמָקוֹם גָּלוּי וּמְפֻרְסָם אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לִמְחוֹת בְּיָדוֹ מֵעִקַּר הַדִּין לה וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם טוֹב לְהַחֲמִיר וְלִמְחוֹת בְּיָדוֹ לָחוּשׁ לְרִנּוּן שָׁעָה שֶׁלֹּא יָרֹנּוּ אַחֲרָיו21 לוֹמַר שֶׁנָּכְרִי עוֹשֶׂה מְלָאכָה בְּשַׁבָּת בִּשְׁלִיחוּתוֹ: לו

6 Even when [a non-Jewish contractor] is performing a task with a detached article, if the task is for the sake of [a project that is] attached to the ground, e.g., he is hewing stones or planing beams in order to make them part of a building, [the Jewish employer] must admonish [the non-Jewish contractor] if [the task is being carried out] within [the town’s] Shabbos limits.22 Even if [the non-Jewish worker] carries out the task far away from the building and even if he performs it in his own home, in which case it is not apparent that he is carrying out the task for the building owned by the Jewish [employer], nevertheless, since ultimately [these articles] will be made part of the building, they are governed by the same laws as the building itself.23

ו אֲפִלּוּ לַעֲשׂוֹת בְּתָלוּשׁ אִם הוּא לְצֹרֶךְ מְחֻבָּר כְּגוֹן (ד) לִפְסוֹל הָאֲבָנִים וּלְתַקֵּן הַקּוֹרוֹת כְּדֵי לְשַׁקְּעָם בְּבִנְיָןלז צָרִיךְ לִמְחוֹת בְּיָדוֹ לח אִם הוּא בְּתוֹךְ הַתְּחוּם לט,22 אֲפִלּוּ עוֹשֶׂה רָחוֹק מֵהַבִּנְיָן וַאֲפִלּוּ עוֹשֶׂה בְּבֵיתוֹ שֶׁאֵין הַדָּבָר נִכָּר שֶׁעוֹשֶׂה בִּשְׁבִיל בִּנְיָן זֶה שֶׁל הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל מִכָּל מָקוֹם כֵּיוָן שֶׁסּוֹפָן לְשַׁקְּעָם בְּהַבִּנְיָן הֲרֵי דִינָם כְּהַבִּנְיָן עַצְמוֹ: מ,23

7 [In the latter instance,] if the Jewish [employer] did not admonish [the non-Jewish worker] and [the non-Jewish worker] was employed as a contractor, it is permitted to place [the stones or the beams] in the building. Similarly, the Jewish [employer] is permitted to enter and dwell in a house that was built [for him] on Shabbos by [a non-Jewish] contractor, because there is an authority who permits [hiring] a non-Jewish contractor [who performs work on Shabbos] even concerning an entity that is [itself] attached to the ground. His opinion is worthy of being relied on after the fact.24

If, by contrast, a non-Jewish day-worker25 performed the labor of building on Shabbos, it is proper to be stringent and for no Jew26 to ever enter [the building he constructed]. Even if the Jewish [employer] hired the non-Jew as a day-worker with the stipulation that he not work on Shabbos, and the non-Jew worked on Shabbos on his own initiative, it is proper that no Jew ever enter the building if the non-Jew worked for the benefit of the Jewish [employer].27 If, however, [the non-Jew’s] intent was for his own benefit,28 it is permitted even for the employer to dwell in [the building], since he stipulated with [the worker] not to build it on Shabbos.

ז וְאִם לֹא מִחָה בְּיָדוֹ וְעָשָׂה בְּשַׁבָּת בְּקַבְּלָנוּת יֵשׁ לְהַתִּיר לְשַׁקְּעָם בַּבִּנְיָן מא וְכֵן הַבַּיִת שֶׁנִּבְנָה בְּשַׁבָּת בְּקַבְּלָנוּת מֻתָּר לְהַיִּשְׂרָאֵל לִכָּנֵס לָדוּר בּוֹ מב לְפִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ מִי שֶׁמַּתִּיר קַבְּלָנוּת נָכְרִי וַאֲפִלּוּ בִּמְחֻבָּר מג וּכְדַאי הוּא לִסְמוֹךְ עָלָיו בְּדִיעֲבַד מד,24 אֲבָל נָכְרִי שְׂכִיר יוֹם25 שֶׁבָּנָה בְּשַׁבָּת נָכוֹן לְהַחֲמִיר שֶׁלֹּא יִכָּנֵס בּוֹ שׁוּם יִשְׂרָאֵל26 לְעוֹלָם מה וַאֲפִלּוּ אִם כְּשֶׁשָּׂכַר אֶת הַנָּכְרִי לְיָמִים הִתְנָה עִמּוֹ שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲשֶׂה בְּיוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת וְהַנָּכְרִי עָשָׂה מֵעַצְמוֹ (וְ)אִם עָשָׂה לְטוֹבַת הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל27 נָכוֹן שֶׁלֹּא יִכָּנֵס בּוֹ שׁוּם יִשְׂרָאֵל לְעוֹלָם מו אֲבָל אִם נִתְכַּוֵּן לְטוֹבַת עַצְמוֹ28 מֻתָּר אֲפִלּוּ לְבַעַל הַבַּיִת לָדוּר בּוֹ כֵּיוָן שֶׁהִתְנָה עִמּוֹ שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲשֶׂה בְּשַׁבָּת: מז

8 In some places, communities are accustomed to follow a lenient approach and hire non-Jews on a contractual basis to remove garbage from the streets. The non-Jews work for their own benefit.29 [Although the non-Jews work] even on Shabbos, [these communities] are not concerned about the impression that may be created. There are authorities who offer some justification for such conduct,30 [explaining as follows:] It has already become a matter of public knowledge that it is common to hire a non-Jew as a contractor to remove garbage and not for him to work as a day-worker.31 Accordingly, there is no need to be concerned about the impression that may be created, as stated in sec. 243[:10] with regard to [workers hired as contractors for] bathhouses, ovens, and mills. Consult that source.

Based on this rationale, it would be permitted to allow non-Jews to build a synagogue on Shabbos if the locale is one in which it is public knowledge that buildings are constructed by professionals working as contractors. [In such a locale, houses are] not [built] by day-workers, as in most places, where only the architect is a contractor. By contrast, the craftsmen who perform the work under his direction are day-workers and in such an instance, a prohibition exists because of the impression that may be created.32

Nevertheless, [even in a locale where builders are only employed as contractors,] leniency may be granted only in a pressing situation, e.g., there is concern that over the course of time, work on building the synagogue might be forced to cease entirely because of the wickedness of [some of] the non-Jewish [authorities].33

When, however, the situation is not pressing, [such labor] should not be permitted because of the desecration of the honor of G‑d’s name among the non-Jews. [They will look down upon the Jews,] since they do not allow any person to perform work in public on their sacred days, yet we do allow work to be performed for us on Shabbos in public.34 It is, however, customary to permit sweeping the streets, even when the situation is not pressing, [because] the task is not identified with [the Jews] to the same degree [as building a synagogue or other similar tasks]; as such, the desecration of G‑d’s name is not involved. Nevertheless, in a place where there is no established custom, one should not be lenient, even with regard to sweeping the streets.

ח בִּקְצָת מְקוֹמוֹת נוֹהֲגִין הֶתֵּר שֶׁהַקָּהָל שׂוֹכְרִים נָכְרִים בְּקַבְּלָנוּת לְפַנּוֹת הַזֶּבֶל מִן הָרְחוֹב וְהַנָּכְרִי עוֹשֶׂה לְעַצְמוֹ29 וַאֲפִלּוּ בְּשַׁבָּת וְאֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁין לְמַרְאִית הָעַיִן מח (ה) וְיֵשׁ שֶׁלִּמְּדוּ עֲלֵיהֶם זְכוּת מט,30 לְפִי שֶׁכְּבָר נִתְפַּרְסֵם הַדָּבָר שֶׁדֶּרֶךְ לִשְׂכּוֹר נָכְרִי בְּקַבְּלָנוּת לְפַנּוֹת הַזֶּבֶל וְלֹא שְׂכִיר יוֹם נ,31 וְאִם כֵּן אֵין כַּאן חֲשַׁשׁ מַרְאִית הָעַיִן כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן רמ"ג נא לְעִנְיַן מֶרְחָץ תַּנּוּר וְרֵחַיִם עַיֵּן שָׁם.

וּמִטַּעַם זֶה יֵשׁ לְהַתִּיר לְהַנִּיחַ לְנָכְרִים לִבְנוֹת בֵּית הַכְּנֶסֶת בְּשַׁבָּת אִם הוּא מָקוֹם שֶׁמְּפֻרְסָם בּוֹ דֶּרֶךְ בִּנְיַן הַבָּתִּים עַל יְדֵי אֻמָּנִים קַבְּלָנִים וְלֹא עַל יְדֵי שְׂכִירֵי יוֹם כְּמוֹ שֶׁהוּא בְּרֹב הַמְּקוֹמוֹת שֶׁהָאַדְרִיכָל לְבַדּוֹ הוּא קַבְּלָן וְהָאֻמָּנִים עוֹשֵׂי מְלָאכָה שֶׁתַּחְתָּיו הֵם שְׂכִירֵי יוֹם שֶׁשָּׁם יֵשׁ חֲשַׁשׁ מַרְאִית הָעַיִן נב,32 וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם אֵין לְהַתִּיר אֶלָּא בִּשְׁעַת הַדְּחַק כְּגוֹן שֶׁיֵּשׁ חֲשַׁשׁ שֶׁמָּא יִתְבַּטֵּל בְּהֶמְשֵׁךְ הַזְּמַן בִּנְיַן בֵּית הַכְּנֶסֶת לְגַמְרֵי מֵחֲמַת רִשְׁעַת הַנָּכְרִים נג,33 אֲבָל שֶׁלֹּא בִּשְׁעַת הַדְּחַק אֵין לְהַתִּיר מִפְּנֵי חִלּוּל הַשֵּׁם בְּעֵינֵי הַנָּכְרִים שֶׁהֵם אֵינָם מַנִּיחִים לְשׁוּם אָדָם לַעֲשׂוֹת מְלָאכָה בְּפַרְהֶסְיָא בְּיוֹם אֵידָם וְאָנוּ מַנִּיחִים לַעֲשׂוֹת מְלָאכָה בְּשַׁבָּת בִּשְׁבִילֵנוּ בְּפַרְהֶסְיָא נד,34 אֲבָל כִּבּוּד הָרְחוֹב אֵינוֹ נִקְרָא עַל שֵׁם הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל כָּל כָּךְ וְאֵין בּוֹ חִלּוּל הַשֵּׁם לָכֵן נוֹהֲגִין לְהַתִּירוֹ אַף שֶׁלֹּא בִּשְׁעַת הַדְּחַק וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁאֵין שָׁם מִנְהָג אֵין לְהָקֵל אַף בְּכִבּוּד הָרְחוֹב: נה

9 [The following laws apply when a person] hired a non-Jew for a year or two to serve as a scribe or a weaver at any time [his services are] needed during his period of employment, as is the practice of the nobility. They [hire] special scribes who write for them whenever they are in need [of their services], and when they are not needed, [the scribes] are idle.35 It is permissible [for a Jew who hired such a scribe] to allow [the scribe to write] material on Shabbos, concerning which the Jew had instructed him before Shabbos,36 provided [the non-Jew] does not perform the work in the domain of the Jewish [employer].37 (Moreover, he must be careful not to tell the non-Jew to perform this work on Shabbos.)38 [The rationale:] The Jewish [employer] does not profit at all from [the scribe] working on Shabbos, because if he did not do this work on Shabbos, he would do it after Shabbos.

Even if the Jewish [employer] needs the [completed] work immediately on Saturday night, [and thus, it is to his advantage that the work was performed on Shabbos], nevertheless, this is not considered as profit, merely as a benefit. An example of profit would be if [the Jew’s benefit from] the work would be nullified entirely if [the work was] not performed on Shabbos. In such an instance, [the Jew] is profiting from the fact that the work was performed on Shabbos, as will be stated in sec. 252[:5].39 Similarly, [it is forbidden] if [the Jewish employer] profits in another way, e.g., if his wealth is amplified and increased because of the work performed on Shabbos, as stated in sec. 243[:3].40

ט מִי שֶׁשָּׂכַר לוֹ נָכְרִי (ו) לְשָׁנָה אוֹ לִשְׁתַּיִם שֶׁיִּכְתּוֹב לוֹ אוֹ שֶׁיֶּאֱרוֹג לוֹ בְּכָל עֵת שֶׁיִּצְטָרֵךְ בְּתוֹךְ זְמַן מֶשֶׁךְ שְׂכִירוּתוֹ נו כְּמוֹ שֶׁהוּא דֶרֶךְ הַשָּׂרִים שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם סוֹפֵר מְיֻחָד שֶׁכּוֹתֵב לוֹ כָּל עֵת שֶׁצָּרִיךְ וּכְשֶׁאֵין צָרִיךְ הוּא יוֹשֵׁב בָּטֵל נז,35 מֻתָּר לְהַנִּיחוֹ שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה בְּשַׁבָּת מַה שֶּׁצִּוָּה לוֹ קֹדֶם הַשַּׁבָּת36 (רַק שֶׁיִּזָּהֵר שֶׁלֹּא יֹאמַר לוֹ שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה בְּשַׁבָּת נח)38 אִם אֵינוֹ עוֹשֶׂה בְּבֵית הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל נט,38 לְפִי שֶׁאֵין לְיִשְׂרָאֵל רֶוַח בְּמַה שֶּׁעוֹשֶׂה בְּשַׁבָּת שֶׁאִם לֹא יַעֲשֶׂה בְּשַׁבָּת יַעֲשֶׂה אַחַר הַשַּׁבָּת וְאַף אִם הַמְּלָאכָה צְרִיכָה לוֹ בְּמוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת מִיָּד מִכָּל מָקוֹם אֵין זֶה נִקְרָא רֶוַח אֶלָּא הֲנָאָה בְּעָלְמָא ס וְרֶוַח הוּא כְּגוֹן שֶׁהַמְּלָאכָה הָיְתָה מִתְבַּטֶּלֶת לְגַמְרֵי אִם לֹא הָיְתָה נַעֲשֵׂית בְּשַׁבָּת שֶׁאָז הוּא מַרְוִיחַ הַמְּלָאכָה עַל יְדֵי שֶׁנַּעֲשֵׂית בְּשַׁבָּת סא וּכְמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן רנ"ב סב,39 וְכֵן אִם יֵשׁ לוֹ רֶוַח אַחֵר שֶׁרְכוּשׁוֹ מִתְרַוֵּחַ וּמִתְרַבֶּה עַל יְדֵי שֶׁנַּעֲשֵׂית הַמְּלָאכָה בְּשַׁבָּת כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן רמ"ג: סג,40

10 When is the [license] granted? When the Jewish [employer] does not at all object if [the scribe] remains idle after he commands him to perform a task, but leaves him the option to perform it whenever he desires. In such an instance, when he is working on Shabbos, he is working on his own initiative, and not because of his Jewish [employer]. If, however, [the Jewish employer] objects to his remaining idle, [then, when the scribe] works on Shabbos, [he is working] because of the Jewish [employer].41 Therefore, [the Jewish employer] must instruct [the non-Jewish worker] not to perform the task on Shabbos.42If, however, [the non-Jewish worker] does so regardless, [the Jewish employer] need not admonish him, because the non-Jew is acting on his own initiative.

י בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים כְּשֶׁאֵין הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל מַקְפִּיד עִמּוֹ כְּלָל אִם הוּא יוֹשֵׁב וּבָטֵל לְאַחַר שֶׁצִּוָּה לוֹ לַעֲשׂוֹת הַמְּלָאכָה אֶלָּא בְּיָדוֹ לַעֲשׂוֹתָהּ בְּכָל עֵת שֶׁיִּרְצֶה לְפִיכָךְ כְּשֶׁהוּא עוֹשֶׂה בְּשַׁבָּת לְדַעַת עַצְמוֹ הוּא עוֹשֶׂה וְלֹא מֵחֲמַת הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל אֲבָל אִם הוּא מַקְפִּיד עִמּוֹ עַל בִּטּוּלוֹ הֲרֵי הוּא עוֹשֶׂה בְּשַׁבָּת מֵחֲמַת הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל סד,41 לְפִיכָךְ צָרִיךְ הוּא לוֹמַר לוֹ שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲשֶׂה בְּשַׁבָּת42 וְאִם אַף עַל פִּי כֵן הוּא עוֹשֶׂה אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לִמְחוֹת בְּיָדוֹ שֶׁלְּדַעַת עַצְמוֹ הוּא עוֹשֶׂה: סה

11 The above applies when the non-Jewish [worker] is hired only for a specific task, e.g., to serve as a scribe or as a weaver whenever necessary, and after he completes that specific task, he may remain idle. If, however, [the Jewish employer] hired [the non-Jewish worker] to perform any and all tasks necessary during the time of his hire, it is forbidden to allow [the non-Jewish worker] to perform any task on Shabbos. [The rationale is that]the Jewish [employer] profits from the fact that this task is performed on Shabbos, since [in this way, the non-Jewish worker] will be free after Shabbos, and thus required to perform other tasks.

License should not be granted on the basis of the argument that the non-Jewish [worker] is acting for his own benefit, in order to receive his entire wage. For even if he will not perform [this task] on Shabbos, [the Jewish employer] will not deduct anything from his wages, as stated in sec. 243[:3].43

There are authorities who grant license even in such a situation, because the non-Jewish [worker] would never imagine that the Jewish [employer] would not compel him to work on Shabbos and would not deduct anything from his wages if he did not work on Shabbos. Thus he is working faithfully, on his own initiative, to complete the work he contracted to perform when first hired, i.e., to perform all the tasks that the Jewish [employer] will need [performed] throughout the duration of his hire, so that he will pay him his entire wage and not have any complaints against him.

One should not rely on this rationale44 (for the reason explained there),45 except in the cases of: a) [extinguishing] a fire, because of the loss involved, as stated in sec. 334[:26],46 and b) sending a letter, as stated in sec. 247[:10]. Consult that source for the rationale.47

יא וְכָל זֶה כְּשֶׁאֵין הַנָּכְרִי מֻשְׂכָּר לוֹ אֶלָּא לִמְלָאכוֹת מְיֻחָדוֹת כְּגוֹן לִכְתּוֹב אוֹ לֶאֱרוֹג סו בְּכָל עֵת שֶׁיִּצְטָרֵךְ וְאַחַר שֶׁגָּמַר הַמְּלָאכָה הוּא יוֹשֵׁב וּבָטֵל סז אֲבָל אִם שְׂכָרוֹ לְכָל הַמְּלָאכוֹת שֶׁיִּצְטָרֵךְ בְּתוֹךְ מֶשֶׁךְ זְמַן שְׂכִירָתוֹ אָסוּר לְהַנִּיחוֹ שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה בְּשַׁבָּת לְפִי שֶׁהַיִּשְׂרָאֵל מַרְוִיחַ מְלָאכָה זוֹ בְּשַׁבָּת שֶׁהֲרֵי כְּשֶׁיִּהְיֶה פָּנוּי אַחַר הַשַּׁבָּת יִצְטָרֵךְ לַעֲשׂוֹת מְלָאכוֹת אֲחֵרוֹת סח וְאֵין לְהַתִּיר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַנָּכְרִי עוֹשֶׂה לְטוֹבַת עַצְמוֹ כְּדֵי לְקַבֵּל כָּל שְׂכָרוֹ שֶׁהֲרֵי אַף אִם לֹא יַעֲשֶׂה בְּשַׁבָּת לֹא יְנַכֶּה לוֹ כְּלוּם כְּמוֹ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן רמ"ג סט,43 וְיֵשׁ מַתִּירִים ע גַּם בָּזֶה לְפִי שֶׁהַנָּכְרִי אֵינוֹ מַעֲלֶה עַל דַּעְתּוֹ שֶׁהַיִּשְׂרָאֵל אֵינוֹ מַכְרִיחוֹ לַעֲשׂוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת וְשֶׁלֹּא יְנַכֶּה לוֹ כְּלוּם מִשְּׂכָרוֹ אַף אִם לֹא יַעֲשֶׂה כְּלוּם בְּשַׁבָּת אֶלָּא הוּא עוֹשֶׂה מֵאֵלָיו לְפִי תֻמּוֹ לְהַשְׁלִים קַבְּלָנוּתוֹ שֶׁקִּבֵּל עָלָיו בִּתְחִלַּת שְׂכִירוּתוֹ לַעֲשׂוֹת כָּל הַמְּלָאכוֹת שֶׁיִּצְטָרְכוּ לְיִשְׂרָאֵל בְּכָל מֶשֶׁךְ זְמַן שְׂכִירוּתוֹ כְּדֵי שֶׁיְּשַׁלֵּם לוֹ כָּל שְׂכָרוֹ מִשָּׁלֵם וְלֹא יִהְיֶה לוֹ עָלָיו שׁוּם תַּרְעֹמֶת עא וְאֵין לִסְמוֹךְ עַל סְבָרָא זוֹ עב,44 (מִטַּעַם שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר שָׁם)45 כִּי אִם לְעִנְיַן דְּלֵקָה עג מִשּׁוּם הֶפְסֵד כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן של"ד עד,45 וּלְעִנְיַן שְׁלִיחוּת אִגֶּרֶת כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן רמ"ז עה עַיֵּן שָׁם הַטַּעַם: עו,47

12When a Jew purchases [the right to collect] customs duty,48 he is forbidden to receive that duty on Shabbos. Even if, [as payment of the customs duty,] he is brought food that is not muktzeh and is fit to be eaten, e.g., it was brought from within the town’s Shabbos limits,49 and there is no concern that it was picked on this day from a source connected to the ground,50 or [that it comes from a living being that] was trapped on that day, he is forbidden to receive [that food] himself, based on the charge:51 “[You shall honor it (the Shabbos) by (refraining) from…] pursuing your concerns,” i.e., “your concerns” are forbidden [on it], as will be stated in sec. 306[:1].52 Instead, he should hire a non-Jew [for Shabbos] on a contractual basis, i.e., telling him, “When you collect 100 dinarim, I will give you this-and-this amount.” He should not, however, hire the non-Jew as a worker for the Shabbos day, for when the non-Jew is a day-worker, he is the agent of the Jewish [employer]. When, by contrast, he is hired as a contractor, he is not the agent of the Jewish [employer], but is rather working for himself, to increase the fee paid him.

Although the Jewish [employer] designated tasks for him to perform on Shabbos,53this is not included in the prohibition against giving instructions to a non-Jew [to work] on Shabbos, because even for a Jew, accepting the customs duty is forbidden only as a shvus.54Thus, [instructing a non-Jew to collect this duty is] a shvus of a shvus,55and license is granted by some authorities to overstep this restriction when a loss is involved, as will be stated in sec. 307[:12]. True, as will be stated there, there are [other] authorities who forbid [overstepping such a prohibition] even when a loss is involved, unless doing so is necessary to fulfill a mitzvah. Nevertheless, this situation is also considered as involving a mitzvah. For if he will not collect the customs duty from the non-Jews56 on Shabbos, he will not be able to collect it after Shabbos, and the money will remain forever in the possession of the non-Jew. [Thus, by collecting the money, the Jew] is performing a mitzvah through salvaging the money from their hands, as will be stated in Yoreh Deah, sec. 149 and sec. 372.57

יב יִשְׂרָאֵל הַקּוֹנֶה מֶכֶס48 אָסוּר לוֹ לְקַבֵּל מֶכֶס בְּשַׁבָּת אֲפִלּוּ הֱבִיאוֹ דְּבַר מַאֲכָל שֶׁאֵינוֹ מֻקְצֶה וְרָאוּי לַאֲכִילָה כְּגוֹן שֶׁהוּבָא מִתּוֹךְ הַתְּחוּם49 וְהוּא דָּבָר שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ חֲשָׁשׁ שֶׁמָּא נִלְקַט הַיּוֹם מֵהַמְחֻבָּר50 אוֹ שֶׁמָּא נִצַּד הַיּוֹם אַף עַל פִּי כֵן אָסוּר לוֹ לְקַבֵּל בְּעַצְמוֹ מִשּׁוּם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר עז,51 מִמְּצֹא חֶפְצְךָ חֲפָצֶיךָ אֲסוּרִים עח כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן ש"ו עט,52 אֶלָּא שׂוֹכֵר לוֹ נָכְרִי בְּקַבְּלָנוּת דְּהַיְנוּ שֶׁאוֹמֵר לוֹ לִכְשֶׁתִּגְבֶּה מֵאָה דִינָרִים אֶתֵּן לְךָ כָּךְ וְכָךְ אֲבָל לֹא יִשְׂכּוֹר לוֹ נָכְרִי לְיוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת פ שֶׁכְּשֶׁהַנָּכְרִי הוּא שְׂכִיר יוֹם הֲרֵי הוּא כִּשְׁלוּחוֹ שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בְּקַבְּלָנוּת שֶׁאֵינוֹ כִּשְׁלוּחוֹ שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶלָּא לְעַצְמוֹ הוּא טוֹרֵחַ כְּדֵי לְהַרְבּוֹת שְׂכָרוֹ. פא

וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהַיִּשְׂרָאֵל קוֹבֵעַ לוֹ מְלַאכְתּוֹ שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה בְּשַׁבָּת פב,53 אֵין בָּזֶה מִשּׁוּם אֲמִירָה לְנָכְרִי שְׁבוּת פג לְפִי שֶׁקַּבָּלַת הַמֶּכֶס אֵין בָּהּ אִסּוּר אֲפִלּוּ לְיִשְׂרָאֵל אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם שְׁבוּת פד,54 וַהֲרֵי זֶה שְׁבוּת דִּשְׁבוּת55 שֶׁיֵּשׁ מַתִּירִין אוֹתוֹ בִּמְקוֹם הֶפְסֵד כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן ש"ז פה וְאַף שֶׁיֵּשׁ אוֹסְרִין אַף בִּמְקוֹם הֶפְסֵד אִם לֹא לְצֹרֶךְ מִצְוָה כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר שָׁם מִכָּל מָקוֹם כַּאן חָשׁוּב דְּבַר מִצְוָה שֶׁאִם לֹא יִטּוֹל הַמֶּכֶס מֵהַנָּכְרִי56 בְּשַׁבָּת לֹא יוּכַל לִגְבּוֹתוֹ אַחַר הַשַּׁבָּת וְיִשְׁתַּקֵּעַ הַמָּמוֹן בְּיַד הַנָּכְרִי פו וַהֲרֵי הוּא עוֹשֶׂה מִצְוָה בְּמַה שֶּׁמַּצִּיל הַמָּמוֹן מִיָּדָם פז כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּיוֹרֶה דֵעָה סִמָּן קמ"ט פח וְשע"ב: פט,57

13 Even if collecting the customs duty requires the performance of a [Scripturally] forbidden labor, e.g., he must write, [the Jewish proprietor] is permitted to instruct a non-Jew to perform [this task] on Shabbos as a contractor. [The rationale:] A person panics over [the possibly loss of] his money, and if he is not granted license to instruct a non-Jew [to perform this task], he may personally involve himself in the task and might forget and be motivated to write [on Shabbos].58For this reason, he is released from the prohibition against instructing a non-Jew, which is [only] of Rabbinic origin, lest he violate [the more serious prohibition against] writing, which is of Scriptural origin.

יג אֲפִלּוּ אִם הוּא מֶכֶס שֶׁצָּרִיךְ לַעֲשׂוֹת בּוֹ מְלָאכָה גְמוּרָה כְּגוֹן שֶׁצָּרִיךְ לִכְתּוֹב אַף עַל פִּי כֵן מֻתָּר לוֹמַר לְנָכְרִי שֶׁיִּתְעַסֵּק בּוֹ בְּשַׁבָּת בְּקַבְּלָנוּת לְפִי שֶׁאָדָם בָּהוּל עַל מָמוֹנוֹ וְאִם לֹא נַתִּיר לוֹ אֲמִירָה לְנָכְרִי יָבֹא לְהִתְעַסֵּק בְּעַצְמוֹ וְשֶׁמָּא יִשְׁכַּח וְיִכְתּוֹב58 לְפִיכָךְ מַתִּירִים לוֹ אִסּוּר אֲמִירָה לְנָכְרִי שֶׁהוּא מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יָבֹא לִידֵי כְתִיבָה הָאֲסוּרָה מִן הַתּוֹרָה: צ

14 Similarly, it is permitted to sublease [the right to collect] the customs duty to a non-Jew, i.e., the [non-Jew] will take whatever he collects on Shabbos for himself be it a large amount or a small amount — and he will give the Jewish [proprietor] a fixed amount. In this way, he is laboring on his own behalf and not acting as the agent of the Jewish [proprietor].

When [the Jewish proprietor] subleases the right to collect the customs duty to the non-Jew or when he hires the non-Jew as a contractor, we are not concerned with the impression that might be created (maris ayin), i.e., that an onlooker might say that [the non-Jew] is hired as a day-worker.59 [The rationale: Our Sages] did not issue decrees concerning the impression that might be created when a significant loss is involved.60 Although at times the above situation involves only a minor loss, nevertheless, since not receiving customs duty on Shabbos generallyinvolves a significant loss, our Sages did not make any distinctions. They completely did away with [all] decrees involving the impression that might be created with regard to customs duty and other analogous situations, which in most cases involve significant [financial] loss.

יד וְכֵן מֻתָּר לוֹ לְהַשְׂכִּיר לְנָכְרִי אֶת הַמֶּכֶס שֶׁיִּטּוֹל לְעַצְמוֹ מַה שֶּׁיִּגְבֶּה בְּשַׁבָּת הֵן רַב הֵן מְעַט וְהוּא יִתֵּן לְיִשְׂרָאֵל דָּבָר קָצוּב שֶׁנִּמְצָא שֶׁהוּא טוֹרֵחַ לְעַצְמוֹ וְאֵינוֹ כִּשְׁלוּחוֹ שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל צא וּכְשֶׁמַּשְׂכִּיר הַמֶּכֶס לְנָכְרִי וְכֵן כְּשֶׁשּׂוֹכֵר לוֹ הַנָּכְרִי בְּקַבְּלָנוּת אֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁין לְמַרְאִית הָעַיִן שֶׁהָרוֹאֶה יֹאמַר שְׂכִיר יוֹם הוּא אֶצְלוֹ59 לְפִי (ז) שֶׁבִּמְקוֹם הֶפְסֵד גָּדוֹל לֹא גָזְרוּ עַל מַרְאִית הָעַיִן צב,60 וְאַף אִם לִפְעָמִים הוּא הֶפְסֵד מוּעָט מִכָּל מָקוֹם כֵּיוָן שֶׁעַל הָרֹב דֶּרֶךְ לִהְיוֹת הֶפְסֵד גָּדוֹל בִּמְנִיעַת קַבָּלַת הַמֶּכֶס בְּשַׁבָּתוֹת לֹא חִלְּקוּ חֲכָמִים וְהִתִּירוּ לְגַמְרֵי גְּזֵרָה זוֹ שֶׁל מַרְאִית הָעַיִן בְּמֶכֶס וּבְכָל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָזֶה שֶׁדֶּרֶךְ לִהְיוֹת שָׁם הֶפְסֵד גָּדוֹל עַל הָרֹב: צג

15 When [the Jewish proprietor] subleases the right to collect customs duty to a non-Jew, he may sublease the right to Shabbos alone, without combining it together with other days.61 This situation does not resemble a bathhouse, which is forbidden to be hired out for Shabbos alone,62 so that [the Jewish owner] will not be receiving payment for Shabbos without being combined with [payment for] the other days. [The reason for the distinction:] The physical property of the bathhouse belongs to [the Jewish owner] on Shabbos as well. When the non-Jew gives [the Jewish owner] payment for his bathhouse that was hired out to him on Shabbos, the Jewish [owner] is deriving profit from his own bathhouse on Shabbos. This profit is referred to as “payment for Shabbos” (s’char Shabbos), and is forbidden to be accepted unless it is combined [with payment for other days].

When, by contrast, the right to customs duty and the like is leased for Shabbos, [the non-Jew] has been sold [the rights to] that day in their entirety. It is not considered as payment for Shabbos at all, for the non-Jew is not paying [the Jewish proprietor] rent. Instead, he has purchased [the rights to the customs duty] for [the Shabbos] dayfrom [the Jewish proprietor] in their entirety.63 This resembles an instance where [a Jew] knows that merchandise will be brought to him on Shabbos, and he sells it to a non-Jew on Friday with the understanding that the [non-Jew] will take it on Shabbos for himself. In such a situation, the Jew is not receiving “payment for Shabbos.64

טו וּכְשֶׁמַּשְׂכִּיר הַמֶּכֶס לְנָכְרִי יָכוֹל לְהַשְׂכִּיר לוֹ לְיוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת בִּלְבָד שֶׁלֹּא בְהַבְלָעָה עִם שְׁאָר הַיָּמִים צד,61 וְאֵינוֹ דוֹמֶה לְמֶרְחָץ שֶׁאָסוּר לְהַשְׂכִּירוֹ לְשַׁבָּת בִּלְבָד62 כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִטּוֹל שָׂכָר בְּשַׁבָּת שֶׁלֹּא בְהַבְלָעָה צה לְפִי שֶׁהַמֶּרְחָץ גּוּפוֹ קָנוּי לוֹ אַף בְּיוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת וּכְשֶׁהַנָּכְרִי נוֹתֵן לוֹ שָׂכָר בְּעַד מֶרְחָץ שֶׁלּוֹ שֶׁהָיָה מֻשְׂכָּר לוֹ לְיוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת הֲרֵי מִשְׂתַּכֵּר הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל בְּמֶרְחָץ שֶׁלּוֹ בְּשַׁבָּת וַהֲרֵי זֶה נִקְרָא שְׂכַר שַׁבָּת וְאָסוּר לִטְּלוֹ שֶׁלֹּא בְהַבְלָעָה מַה שֶּׁאֵין כֵּן בְּמֶכֶס וְכַיּוֹצֵא בוֹ שֶׁכְּשֶׁהִשְׂכִּירוֹ לְנָכְרִי לְיוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת הֲרֵי מְכָרוֹ לוֹ לְגַמְרֵי לְיוֹם זֶה וְאֵין כַּאן שְׂכַר שַׁבָּת כְּלָל שֶׁאֵין הַנָּכְרִי נוֹתֵן לוֹ שָׂכָר כְּלָל אֶלָּא קָנָה מִמֶּנּוּ לְגַמְרֵי לְיוֹם זֶה63 וַהֲרֵי זֶה דוֹמֶה לְמִי שֶׁיּוֹדֵעַ שֶׁיָּבִיאוּ לוֹ סְחוֹרָה בְּשַׁבָּת וּמוֹכְרָהּ לְנָכְרִי מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת שֶׁיְּקַבְּלֶנָּה לְמָחָר לְעַצְמוֹ שֶׁאֵין בְּזֶה מִשּׁוּם שְׂכַר שַׁבָּת: צו,64

16 Similarly, when a Jew leases the right to mint coins from a king,65 he may sublease that right to a non-Jew for Shabbos. This is not considered as payment for Shabbos, because the non-Jew is not paying him a fee for something that [the Jew] owns on Shabbos, for indeed, all [the coins] belong to the king. The Jewish [contractor] merely acquires the right [to mint the coins] from the king and he sells [that right] in its entirety to the non-Jew for [the Shabbos] day. Similarly, [the Jewish contractor] can hire a non-Jew to work for him as a contractor, as explained [above] with regard to customs duty.

Although minting the coins creates noise on Shabbos,66 this is not of consequence, because the right to mint them has already been leased to a non-Jew or he was hired as a contractor.

טז וְכֵן יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁשָּׂכַר הַמַּטְבֵּעַ מֵהַמֶּלֶךְ65 יָכוֹל לְהַשְׂכִּירוֹ לְנָכְרִי לְיוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת צז שֶׁאֵין בְּזֶה מִשּׁוּם שְׂכַר שַׁבָּת שֶׁאֵין הַנָּכְרִי נוֹתֵן לוֹ שָׂכָר כְּלָל בְּעַד דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא שֶׁלּוֹ בְּשַׁבָּת שֶׁהֲרֵי הַכֹּל הוּא שֶׁל הַמֶּלֶךְ אֶלָּא שֶׁהָרְשׁוּת בִּלְבָד שֶׁיֵּשׁ לְיִשְׂרָאֵל מֵהַמֶּלֶךְ הוּא שֶׁהִשְׂכִּיר לוֹ וַהֲרֵי מְכָרוֹ לוֹ לְגַמְרֵי לְיוֹם זֶה צח וְכֵן יָכוֹל לִשְׂכּוֹר לוֹ נָכְרִי בְּקַבְּלָנוּת עַל דֶּרֶךְ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּמֶכֶס וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמַּשְׁמִיעִים קוֹל בְּשַׁבָּת66 בְּהַכָּאַת הַמַּטְבֵּעַ צט אֵין בְּכָךְ כְּלוּם ק כֵּיוָן שֶׁכְּבָר הִשְׂכִּירוֹ לַנָּכְרִי אוֹ שֶׁשְּׂכָרוֹ לוֹ בְּקַבְּלָנוּת: קא

17 It is forbidden for the Jewish [proprietor] or his agent to sit near the non-Jew at the time he collects the customs duty or [operates] the mint.67 Although the Jewish [proprietor] has already leased out the concern and has no involvement with it, nevertheless, when he sits near [the non-Jewish operator], it appears as if the non-Jew is working for him and for his purposes. This is forbidden because of the impression it may give.

If he hired the non-Jew as a contractor, and is afraid that he will steal a great deal from him, since there is a suspicion that a substantial loss [may be incurred], he can have another Jew sit near [the non-Jew] or he may do so himself, to watch so that he does not steal. For when there is a possibility of a substantial loss,68 we are not concerned with the impression that may be created.69

יז וְאָסוּר לְהַיִּשְׂרָאֵל אוֹ שְׁלוּחוֹ קב לֵישֵׁב אֵצֶל הַנָּכְרִי בִּשְׁעַת קַבָּלַת הַמֶּכֶס אוֹ הַמַּטְבֵּעַ קג,67 אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁכְּבָר הִשְׂכִּירוֹ לוֹ וְאֵין לְהַיִּשְׂרָאֵל שׁוּם עֵסֶק בּוֹ מִכָּל מָקוֹם כְּשֶׁהוּא יוֹשֵׁב אֶצְלוֹ הֲרֵי הוּא נִרְאֶה כְּעוֹשֶׂה בִּשְׁבִילוֹ וּלְצָרְכּוֹ וְאָסוּר מִפְּנֵי מַרְאִית הָעַיִן קד וְאִם שָׂכַר לוֹ אֶת הַנָּכְרִי בְּקַבְּלָנוּת וּמִתְיָרֵא שֶׁמָּא יִגְנוֹב הַרְבֵּה כֵּיוָן שֶׁיֵּשׁ (ח) חֲשַׁשׁ הֶפְסֵד מְרֻבֶּה יָכוֹל לְהוֹשִׁיב אֶצְלוֹ יִשְׂרָאֵל אוֹ לֵישֵׁב בְּעַצְמוֹ לְשָׁמְרוֹ שֶׁלֹּא יִגְנוֹב קה שֶׁבִּמְקוֹם הֶפְסֵד מְרֻבֶּה68 אֵין חוֹשְׁשִׁים לְמַרְאִית הָעַיִן: קו,69

18 When does the above [leniency] apply? When the Jew who sits [near the non-Jew] does not watch over and scrutinize the non-Jew’s dealings closely, but merely [watches and scrutinizes that the non-Jew] places all [the money] received in the chest holding the customs duty or the proceeds from the coins, [assuring] that he does not steal anything for himself. It is, however, forbidden for [the Jew] to scrutinize and obtain full knowledge of what the non-Jew is occupied with, so as to be able to make an [accurate] reckoning with him [after the conclusion of Shabbos]. Since he is forbidden to make a reckoning with [the non-Jew] on Shabbos,70it is also forbidden to watch over him closely for the sake of a reckoning that he will make the following day. For whenever an activity is forbidden on Shabbos, it is also forbidden to make preparations that enable that activity to be performed after Shabbos, as stated in sec. 306[:1].71

יח בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים כְּשֶׁיִּשְׂרָאֵל הַיּוֹשֵׁב אֵינוֹ מַשְׁגִּיחַ וּמְעַיֵּן עַל הַנָּכְרִי רַק שֶׁיַּנִּיחַ הַכֹּל לְתֵבַת הַמֶּכֶס אוֹ הַמַּטְבֵּעַ וְלֹא יִגְנוֹב לְעַצְמוֹ כְּלוּם אֲבָל אָסוּר לוֹ לְעַיֵּן וְלֵידַע מַה הוּא הַהִתְעַסְּקוּת שֶׁעוֹשֶׂה הַנָּכְרִי כְּדֵי לִקַּח מִמֶּנּוּ חֶשְׁבּוֹן עַל זֶה דְּכֵיוָן קז שֶׁבְּשַׁבָּת עַצְמָהּ אָסוּר לִקַּח מִמֶּנּוּ חֶשְׁבּוֹן קח,70 אָסוּר לוֹ גַּם כֵּן לְעַיֵּן עָלָיו בִּשְׁבִיל הַחֶשְׁבּוֹן שֶׁלְּמָחָר שֶׁכָּל דָּבָר שֶׁאָסוּר לַעֲשׂוֹתוֹ בְּשַׁבָּת אָסוּר לְהָכִין וּלְהַזְמִין אֶת עַצְמוֹ כְּדֵי לַעֲשׂוֹתוֹ אַחַר הַשַּׁבָּת כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן ש"ו: קט,71

19 One may give silver72 to a non-Jew to make into coins for him on a contractual basis. The non-Jew can then work for his own sake, even on Shabbos.73 Although this makes noise in public [on Shabbos], that is of no consequence. Since it is not a matter of public knowledge74 that [the non-Jew] is acting on behalf of the Jew, there is no concern about the impression that may be created.

יט מֻתָּר לִתֵּן כֶּסֶף72 לְנָכְרִי בְּקַבְּלָנוּת לְתַקֵּן לוֹ מָעוֹת וְהַנָּכְרִי עוֹשֶׂה לְעַצְמוֹ אֲפִלּוּ בְּשַׁבָּת73 וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמַּשְׁמִיעַ קוֹל בְּפַרְהֶסְיָא אֵין בְּכָךְ כְּלוּם כֵּיוָן שֶׁאֵין יָדוּעַ לָרַבִּים74 שֶׁהוּא עוֹשֶׂה בִּשְׁבִיל יִשְׂרָאֵל אֵין כַּאן חֲשַׁשׁ מַרְאִית הָעַיִן: קי

20 [The following rules apply when] a Jew purchases [the right to produce] salt from the local ruler for a year, i.e., however much salt that he can produce that year belongs to him [and he can sell it as he desires. To facilitate this endeavor,] he hires non-Jewish workers for a year or a month, and determines their wages according to the extent of their work, i.e., for this-and-this amount of salt that they [produce by] boiling off [the water], he pays them this-and-this amount.75 Although they boil [the water to produce the salt] in utensils belonging to the Jewish [proprietor], it is permitted to allow them to work on Shabbos, because a person is not commanded to have his utensils rest on Shabbos, as stated in sec. 246[:1]. And the non-Jews are contractors, working for their own benefit, in order to increase their wages. For their wages are not paid according to the days or months [that they work], but instead are paid according to the amount [of salt] they produce. Hence, by working on Shabbos, they have their own benefit in mind.76

(True, if they do not perform their work, the Jewish [proprietor] suffers a loss. For the Jewish [proprietor] purchases [the right to produce all] the salt that will be produced within a given year, and he receives no compensation for the days when [work is not performed and] no salt is produced, since the local ruler will not deduct anything from the fee he is required to pay, nor will he allow him to produce salt on an equivalent number of days the following year. For this reason, when the Jewish [proprietor] hires workers for a month or a year, he is very insistent that they not cease work even for a day. They also work on Shabbos, due to his insistence. Nevertheless, this is not sufficient reason to require him to admonish them and tell them that they cannot work on Shabbos. Instead, it is sufficient for him to tell them that they are not required to work on Shabbos on his behalf, and if they so desire, they need not work on Shabbos.77Thus, if on their own initiative, they nevertheless work [on Shabbos] to increase their income, the [Jewish proprietor] need not say anything to them. Although he receives great benefit from [their work], it is of no consequence, since the non-Jews have their own benefit in mind.)

[Their work] is not forbidden because of the impression it might create, because an observer will not [necessarily] know that [the enterprise where the water] is boiled belongs to a Jew, because neither the utensils used to boil the water78 nor the wood used as fuel is identified with the Jewish [proprietor], i.e., it is not public knowledge that he is the owner.

[This leniency is granted] provided [the non-Jewish workers] do not bring wood from the domain of the Jewish [proprietor] on Shabbos.79[The rationale:] Work that is contracted out [to non-Jewish workers] is permitted to be performed [on Shabbos] only when, on Friday, [the proprietor] provides them with everything he desires to give them that they need for their work. Even when [the Jewish proprietor] gives the non-Jewish workers the wood on Friday, but they do not remove it from his domain before nightfall, it is forbidden for him to allow them to remove it on Shabbos, because of the impression that may be created. [People may] say that he gave them the wood on Shabbos, as will be explained in sec. 246[:4-5]. Consult that source.

כ יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁשָּׂכַר הַמֶּלַח מֵהַשָּׂר לְשָׁנָה שֶׁכַּמָּה מֶלַח שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה בְּתוֹךְ הַשָּׁנָה הוּא שֶׁלּוֹ וְהוּא שׂוֹכֵר לוֹ פּוֹעֲלִים נָכְרִים לְשָׁנָה אוֹ לְחֹדֶשׁ וְקָצַץ לָהֶם שְׂכָרָם לְפִי רִבּוּי מְלַאכְתָּם דְּהַיְנוּ מִכָּל כָּךְ וְכָךְ מֶלַח שֶׁיְּבַשְּׁלוּ נוֹתֵן לָהֶם כָּךְ וְכָךְ75 אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמְּבַשְּׁלִים בְּכֵלִים שֶׁל הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל מֻתָּר לְהַנִּיחָם שֶׁיַּעֲשׂוּ בְּשַׁבָּת קיא שֶׁאֵין אָדָם מְצֻוֶּה עַל שְׁבִיתַת כֵּלָיו כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן רמ"ו קיב וְהַנָּכְרִים הֵם כְּקַבְּלָנִים שֶׁעוֹשִׂים לְטוֹבַת עַצְמָן כְּדֵי לְהַרְבּוֹת בִּשְׂכָרָן שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵין שְׂכָרָם מִשְׁתַּלֵּם לְפִי הַיָּמִים אוֹ חֳדָשִׁים אֶלָּא לְפִי סְכוּם הַמְּלָאכָה שֶׁגּוֹמְרִין וְכָךְ מְשַׁלֵּם לָהֶם נִמְצָא שֶׁהֵם מִתְכַּוְּנִים בַּעֲשִׂיָּתָם בְּשַׁבָּת לְטוֹבַת עַצְמָן.76

(וְאַף שֶׁאִם לֹא הָיוּ עוֹשִׂים בְּשַׁבָּת הָיָה מַגִּיעַ הֶפְסֵד לְיִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁהֲרֵי הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל שָׂכַר הַמֶּלַח שֶׁיְּבַשֵּׁל בְּתוֹךְ שְׁנָתוֹ וְהַיָּמִים שֶׁהֶחְסִיר וְלֹא בִשֵּׁל מֵהֶם אֵין לָהֶם תַּשְׁלוּמִים שֶׁלֹּא יְנַכֶּה לוֹ הַשָּׂר כְּלוּם מִשְּׂכָרוֹ וְגַם לֹא יַנִּיחֶנּוּ לְבַשֵּׁל כְּנֶגְדָּם בְּשָׁנָה הָאַחֶרֶת וּבִשְׁבִיל כָּךְ כְּשֶׁהַיִּשְׂרָאֵל שׂוֹכֵר פּוֹעֲלִים לְחֹדֶשׁ אוֹ לְשָׁנָה הוּא (ט) מַקְפִּיד עֲלֵיהֶם מְאֹד שֶׁלֹּא יְבַטְּלוּ אֲפִלּוּ יוֹם אֶחָד וְהֵם מֻכְרָחִים לַעֲשׂוֹת גַּם בְּשַׁבָּת מֵחֲמַת קְפֵדָתוֹ מִכָּל מָקוֹם בִּשְׁבִיל כָּךְ אֵין צָרִיךְ לִמְחוֹת בְּיָדָם שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲשׂוּ בְּשַׁבָּת קיג אֶלָּא דַּי שֶׁיֹּאמַר לָהֶם שֶׁאֵינָם מֻכְרָחִים לַעֲשׂוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת בִּשְׁבִילוֹ קיד וְאִם יִרְצוּ שֶׁלֹּא לַעֲשׂוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת הָרְשׁוּת בְּיָדָם77 וְאִם אַף עַל פִּי כֵן הֵם עוֹשִׂים מֵאֲלֵיהֶם כְּדֵי לְהַרְבּוֹת בִּשְׂכָרָם אֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר לָהֶם כְּלוּם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמַּגִּיעַ לְיִשְׂרָאֵל הֲנָאָה גְדוֹלָה מִזֶּה אֵין בְּכָךְ כְּלוּם כֵּיוָן שֶׁהַנָּכְרִים מִתְכַּוְּנִים לְטוֹבַת עַצְמָן[)].

וְאֵין לֶאֱסוֹר מִפְּנֵי מַרְאִית הָעַיִן לְפִי שֶׁהָרוֹאֶה אֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ שֶׁבִּשּׁוּל זֶה הוּא שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁהַכֵּלִים שֶׁמְּבַשְּׁלִים בָּהֶם78 וְכֵן הָעֵצִים שֶׁמַּבְעִירִים בָּהֶם אֵין שֵׁם הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל נִקְרָא עֲלֵיהֶם דְּהַיְנוּ שֶׁאֵין מְפֻרְסָם לָרַבִּים שֶׁהֵן שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל. קטו

וּבִלְבָד(י) שֶׁלֹּא יָבִיאוּ עֵצִים מֵרְשׁוּת הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל בְּשַׁבָּת קטז,79 שֶׁכָּל קַבְּלָנוּת אֵינָהּ מֻתֶּרֶת אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן מָסַר לוֹ מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת כָּל מַה שֶּׁרוֹצֶה לִמְסוֹר לוֹ לְצֹרֶךְ הַמְּלָאכָה וַאֲפִלּוּ אִם מָסַר לָהֶם הָעֵצִים מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא הוֹצִיאוּם מֵרְשׁוּתוֹ עַד שֶׁחָשְׁכָה אָסוּר לְהַנִּיחָם שֶׁיּוֹצִיאוּ בְּשַׁבָּת מִפְּנֵי מַרְאִית הָעַיִן שֶׁיֹּאמְרוּ שֶׁבְּשַׁבָּת מָסַר לָהֶם וּכְמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן רמ"ו קיז עַיֵּן שָׁם:

21 If there is concern that an impression may be created [that the work is being performed for the sake of the Jewish proprietor],80 license [for the work to be performed] may not be granted because of the significant loss that the Jewish [proprietor] will suffer [from remaining idle on] all the Shabbasos of the year. [The only exception is] when [having the concern remain idle on Shabbos] will cause him to actually lose money because of what he has to pay to the ruling authority, to his workers, and for his other expenses. If, however, he will not suffer an actual loss, but will merely forfeit [anticipated] profit — i.e., he could have earned a large profit by making salt on Shabbos as well — the prohibition [against having the concern operate on Shabbos] because of the impression that may be created is not lifted for him for this reason.

This situation does not resemble the instances of customs duty and minting coins [mentioned above].81 In those instances, even if he does not suffer an actual loss, merely the loss of the profits he could have gained from the Shabbasos, the prohibition stemming from the impression that may be created is lifted for him. [The rationale for the distinction:] The non-Jewish merchants crossing [the border] on Shabbos already incurred the obligation to pay [the customs duty] to the king. [Similarly,] the Jewish [proprietor] already purchased the right [to collect] this duty from the king. Thus, if the Jewish [proprietor] does not collect [the money] from the merchants, he is forfeiting profit that is already rightfully his.82 Similarly, the coins that the king’s workers mint against the Jewish [proprietor’s] will83 have already been acquired by him. If he does not take them, he will be forfeiting profit that is already rightfully his.84

כאא וְאִם הוּא בָּעִנְיָן שֶׁיֵּשׁ חֲשַׁשׁ מַרְאִית הָעַיִן80 אֵין לְהַתִּיר מֵחֲמַת הֶפְסֵד מְרֻבֶּה שֶׁיַּפְסִיד הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל בְּכָל שַׁבְּתוֹת הַשָּׁנָה אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הוּא בָּעִנְיָן שֶׁמַּפְסִיד הַרְבֵּה מִכִּיסוֹ מִמַּה שֶּׁצָּרִיךְ לְשַׁלֵּם לְהַשָּׂר וְלַפּוֹעֲלִים וְיֶתֶר הוֹצָאוֹתָיו אֲבָל אִם הוּא בָּעִנְיָן שֶׁלֹּא יַפְסִיד כְּלוּם מִכִּיסוֹ אֶלָּא שֶׁמַּפְסִיד הָרֶוַח שֶׁהָיָה יָכוֹל לְהַרְוִיחַ הַרְבֵּה בַּעֲשִׂיַּת הַמֶּלַח גַּם בְּשַׁבָּתוֹת אֵין מַתִּירִין לוֹ בִּשְׁבִיל כָּךְ אִסּוּר שֶׁל מַרְאִית הָעַיִן וְאֵינוֹ דוֹמֶה לְמֶכֶס וּלְמַטְבֵּעַ81 שֶׁאַף אִם הוּא בָּעִנְיָן שֶׁלֹּא יַפְסִיד כְּלוּם מִכִּיסוֹ אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם שֶׁלֹּא יַפְסִיד הָרֶוַח שֶׁל הַשַּׁבָּתוֹת הִתִּירוֹ לוֹ אִסּוּר מַרְאִית הָעַיִן קיח לְפִי שֶׁהַמֶּכֶס כְּבָר נִתְחַיְּבוּ בּוֹ הַנָּכְרִים הַסּוֹחֲרִים הָעוֹבְרִים בְּשַׁבָּת לִתְּנוֹ לְהַמֶּלֶךְ וְהַיִּשְׂרָאֵל כְּבָר קָנָה חִיּוּב זֶה מֵהַמֶּלֶךְ קיט נִמְצָא שֶׁאִם לֹא יִטְּלֶנּוּ הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל מֵהַסּוֹחֲרִים הֲרֵי זֶה כְּמַפְסִיד הָרֶוַח שֶׁבָּא כְּבָר לְכִיסוֹ82 וְכֵן הַמַּטְבֵּעוֹת שֶׁיַּעֲשׂוּ עוֹשֵׂי הַמְּלָאכָה אֲשֶׁר לַמֶּלֶךְ בְּעַל כָּרְחוֹ שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל83 כְּבָר הֵם קְנוּיִים לְיִשְׂרָאֵל וְאִם לֹא יִטְּלֵם הַיִּשְׂרָאֵל הֲרֵי זֶה כְּמַפְסִיד הָרֶוַח שֶׁבָּא כְּבָר לְכִיסוֹ: קכ,84

22 [Similar laws apply] when Jews lease the rights from the ruling authorities to dig in the local mountains and find iron sand from which iron can be produced. That sand is smelted and refined, day and night without respite until the end of the rental period. [The proprietors] hire workers for a year or for a month, determining a wage for them for this-and-this amount of iron [that they will produce]. The laws governing this situation are exactly the same as those governing the leasing of the right to produce salt, provided there is no concern regarding the impressions that may be created, as explained in sec. 243[:15].85 Consult that source.86 Similarly, the same laws apply to those who lease the right to produce glass from the local authorities and the leasing of all other similar [rights].

כב וְיִשְׂרְאֵלִים שֶׁשּׂוֹכְרִים מֵהַשָּׂר שֶׁיִּהְיֶה רְשׁוּת בְּיָדָם לַחְפּוֹר בֶּהָרִים לִמְצוֹא הֶעָפָר שֶׁעוֹשִׂים מִמֶּנּוּ בַּרְזֶל וְשׂוֹרְפִים וְצוֹרְפִים הֶעָפָר יוֹם וְלַיְלָה לֹא יִשְׁבֹּתוּ עַד כְּלוֹת מֶשֶׁךְ זְמַן שְׂכִירוּתָם וְשׂוֹכְרִים לָהֶם פּוֹעֲלִים לְכָךְ לְשָׁנָה אוֹ לְחֹדֶשׁ וְקוֹצְצִים לָהֶם שָׂכָר כָּךְ וְכָךְ בְּעַד כָּךְ וְכָךְ בַּרְזֶל הֲרֵי דִינָם כְּדִין שׂוֹכֵר אֶת הַמֶּלַח לְכָל דָּבָר קכא אִם הוּא בָּעִנְיָן שֶׁאֵין לָחוּשׁ לְמַרְאִית הָעַיִן עַל דֶּרֶךְ שֶׁנִּתְבָּאֵר בְּסִמָּן רמ"ג קכב,8 עַיֵּן שָׁם86 וְכֵן הַדִּין בְּשׂוֹכְרֵי הִתּוּךְ הַזְּכוּכִית מֵהַשָּׂרִים קכג וְכֵן בְּכָל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָזֶה:

In that source, the Alter Rebbe explained that the non-Jew is considered as the Jew’s agent.
See Shabbos 17b; Talmud Yerushalmi, Shabbos 1:8.

There are two different con- tractual arrangements that can define a worker as a contractor:

a) He commits himself to performing a specific task. Even if he is paid by the day, since he is contracted for the task and not for the day, he is considered a contractor. See section 247:7; Kuntreis Acharon 243:1.

b) He commits himself to work for a specific fee that is determined by the work he produces, e.g., $20 for transcribing a page. Even if he does not commit himself to performing the entire task before him, since his wage is determined by his work and not by the hour, he is considered a contractor. The example in this subsection describes a weaver being paid for each cubit of fabric he weaves. See also subsections 20 and 22.
As stated, this applies when a fixed fee was established. In contrast, when a fixed fee was not established, there is a difference whether the non-Jew works with his own materials or with those provided by a Jew. See sec. 252:9; sec. 276:3-4.
See also subsection 9 below.

In his Kuntreis Acharon (note 1), the Alter Rebbe reinforces his ruling here, emphasizing how even when the Jewish employer desires that the work be performed on Shabbos because he needs it directly after Shabbos, the non-Jew is not considered to have acted for the Jew’s benefit. He is considered to worked for the Jew’s benefit only when the Jew realizes tangible gain from the non-Jew’s activity — not just the benefit that it was completed earlier. The Alter Rebbe proceeds to elaborate on situations where the Jew is considered to have benefited from the non-Jew’s work on Shabbos. See also Kuntreis Acharon 252 (note 6) and sec. 276:1, 3, where related matters are discussed.
The basis for the leniency is that — as the text emphasizes — since the non-Jew is a contractor working for a set fee, he is not considered to be working for the Jew, but for his own self. Accordingly, the day when he does the work — whether Shabbos or another day — is of no concern.
In his Mahadura Basra tosec. 243, the Alter Rebbe refined this definition somewhat. Since the day-worker works the entire day, each day could be considered as a job. Thus he could be considered as the Jew’s agent.
For he is paid by the job, not by the hour or by the day. See Moed Kattan 11b.
Talmud Yerushalmi, Shabbos 1:8; see sec. 252:5.
For it is forbidden to tell a non-Jew to perform any forbidden labor on Shabbos. This prohibitionapplies even if the Jew gives the non-Jew these instructions before Shabbos. See sec. 247:1, 252:4, and the sources mentioned there.
If the Jew did not establish a fixed fee for the task, he is forbidden to give it to the non-Jew unless the non-Jew could complete it before Shabbos. See sec. 252:6.
Even though the fee was fixed, if the non-Jew could not complete the task without performing certain activities on Shabbos, it would be as if the Jew had instructed him to work on Shabbos. Instead, there must be time for him to perform these activities either before or after Shabbos.

If the fee was not fixed, there must be time for the non-Jew to complete the task before Shabbos. If, however, the fee was fixed, it is acceptable if the task could be completed after Shabbos.
Talmud Yerushalmi, loc. cit.
Moed Kattan, loc. cit. If the task was performed in a Jew’s domain, it will be evident that the task belonged to a Jew and questions of maris ayin would arise. See further explanation below and in sec. 252:5.
One may, however, allow a non-Jew to rent a field or work in it under a sharecropping arrange- ment. Unlike the present instance of a contractor, there is no question of maris ayin, because the non-Jew receives a share of the produce, and sharecropping agreements are common. See sec. 243:7-8.
2000 cubits (approximately 3000 feet or .9 km) extending outwards from the borders of the town, beyond which it is forbidden to proceed on Shabbos. See secs. 396-397.
I.e.,the neighbors, in contrast to people at large.
In his Kuntreis Acharon (note 2), the Alter Rebbe focuses on the statements of the Shulchan Aruch of Rav Yosef Caro (Orach Chayim 244:1) that it is forbidden for a Jew to hire a non-Jew to perform a task in public even if he established a set fee, because onlookers will not know that the non-Jew was hired as a contractor and might think that he is a hired worker. Magen Avraham 244:2 explains that if the task involves materials that are not attached to the ground, and only a few Jews know that the task is being performed for another Jew, the ruling depends on whether the task is performed publicly (in which case it is prohibited), or privately (in which case it is permitted). According to this approach, it is prohibited, for example, for non-Jewish workers to construct a ship for a Jew on Shabbos in public on the riverbank (Shulchan Aruch of Rav Yosef Caro, Orach Chayim 244:4). Based on this understanding (which is also the initial understanding of the Magen Avraham in 252:10), even if only a few Jews are aware that the work is being performed, it would still be prohibited.

The Alter Rebbe, however, explains that according to the conclusion of the Magen Avraham in sec. 252:10, having a non-Jew perform such work is only prohibited when it is a matter of public knowledge, not if only a few know. Accordingly, if a ship is built in public on a riverbank, building it on Shabbos would be allowed if only a few Jews are aware that the work is being performed for the sake of a Jewish owner.

For this reason, the conclusion of Magen Avraham (gloss 244:2) — that whatever is done in public is prohibited (even if only known by a few Jews) — is no longer tenable. The Alter Rebbe therefore offers a different explanation, stating that, “[By and large,] work performed on a detached article does not become a matter of public knowledge.” Since the ship is detached, then even though it is being built in the public domain, and even though some know about it, building it is nevertheless permitted.Thus, according to the Alter Rebbe, it is forbidden for a non-Jewish contractor to work for a Jew on something not attached to the ground only when: a) it is well known that the project belongs to a Jew, and b) the work is performed in a public place, as stated in subsection 4.
For his conduct will not be observed by any Jews. Hence, there is no need for concern about the impression that he may create. See Moed Kattan, loc. cit.
See also 252:8, where the Alter Rebbe gives another example of work performed by non-Jews in public on Shabbos that is forbidden for this reason.
In his Kuntreis Acharon (note 3), the Alter Rebbe supports his ruling that a prohibition against a non-Jew performing work on something detached exists only when what he’s working on is identified with a Jew. He explains that the prohibition of maris ayin only applies when it resembles the example stated by the Mishnah (Avodah Zarah 21b,cited insec. 243:3):a bathhouse owned by a Jew. He explains that the passage from the Talmud Yerushalmi (Shabbos 1:8) cited above only mentions something attached to the ground, located in a public place, and does not mention something that is detached. The rationale is that whenever something is attached to the ground, it is identified with its Jewish owner because it is connected to his property. This is not necessarily true with regard to something that is detached.

He defines an article as being identified with its Jewish owner when: a) the Jew is the actual legal owner of the property, and b) his ownership is a matter of public knowledge. The Alter Rebbe also raises the possibility that the intent of the term “a Jewish owner” is perhaps not just any Jewish owner (as in the example of clothing that is obviously Jewish; see sec. 252:8), but rather a specific Jewish owner, i.e., the identity of the actual owner is known.
I.e., there is no actual prohibition of maris ayin, nevertheless, it is proper to be stringent. According to the Alter Rebbe, for there to be a prohibition of maris ayin with an entity not attached to the ground, there must be three negative factors: a) the task must be identified with a Jewish employer; b) it must be performed publicly; and c) it must become known to people at large that this task was performed on Shabbos for the sake of a Jew.
Thus, it is possible that other Jews will know about it.
The Alter Rebbe’s ruling is based on the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch of Rav Yosef Caro (Orach Chayim 244:2). Rama mentions the opinion that maintains that if it is not well known that the building materials belong to a Jew, it is permitted to allow a non-Jewish contractor to work with them on Shabbos. In his Kuntreis Acharon (note 4), the Alter Rebbe explains that because of the many authorities who differ with this decision, we are forced to say that Rama’s ruling applies only after the fact, when a substantial loss is involved. Therefore, the Alter Rebbe continues, it was unnecessary for him to mention this ruling of Rama, because it is included in the license granted after the fact in subsection 7.
Although the Alter Rebbe rules leniently here, in the case of a grave that was dug publicly on Shabbos (sec. 325:21), he rules that it is fitting to be stringent and never to benefit from that labor, even if the earth was dug up by a non-Jewish contractor.
Who in general is considered as the Jew’s agent, as explained in sec. 243:4. In the Kuntreis Acharon to that section (note 2), it was explained that in this case, because a set price was established beforehand, there is no actual prohibition involved; it is merely “proper” to be stringent.
I.e., even someone for whom the building was not constructed.
E.g., so that the Jewish owner will be able to enter his home earlier.
E.g., that he receive payment for his work earlier. Tehilah LeDavid 325:37 notes that the Alter Rebbe’s ruling here appears to contradict his ruling in sec. 325:21 which states that a Jew should be stringent and refrain from benefiting from labor which a non-Jew — even a contractor — performed in public on Shabbos when instructed to do so by a Jew, except when the Jew admonished the non-Jew, but the non-Jew did not pay attention and performed the work for his own personal benefit.
Tehilah LeDavid 244:2 maintains that even according to the lenient authorities mentioned here, it is necessary for the garbage collectors to begin their employment before Shabbos.
Magen Avraham 244:8 rationalizes the commonplace practice where the community at large hires non-Jews to perform work in public because there is no concern for maris ayin “when the community at large is involved.” In his Kuntreis Acharon (note 5), the Alter Rebbe explains that there are many authorities who do not accept this opinion and it is not accepted as halachah in our case. Therefore, he offers another rationale for leniency in the main text, i.e., that it is known that garbage removal is done through contractors.
In the present era, outside of Eretz Yisrael, when garbage is collected by the workers of the municipality who are not hired by the Jewish community, there is no difficulty in putting garbage out to be collected on Shabbos. See Minchas Yitzchak, Vol. 5, responsum 105, which deals with this issue.
Even though the workers were hired by the architect, an observer might think that they were hired by the Jewish community. See Lachmei Todah 59a, Imrei Yosher 2:157, Tehilah LeDavid 244:4. This situation, in which the contractor hires day-workers to perform the actual construction, is the common situation in many communities today.
This subject was discussed in responsa authored by the Alter Rebbe’s brother, Rabbi Yehudah Leib, and the Tzemach Tzedek. In response to the Tzemach Tzedek’s query about building a house in Lubavitch, Rabbi Yehudah Leib explains that it is only an expression of pious conduct (midas hachassidus) to be concerned about the desecration of G‑d’s name (chillul Hashem)in such a case, rather than relying on the authorities who allow such work to be performed by contractors. Therefore, where it is well known that everyone builds on a contract basis, Rabbi Yehudah Leib rules leniently even when the building is not for a mitzvah (such as a synagogue, as mentioned in the main text), if there is a possibility of the project falling through (Shaaris Yehudah, responsum 5).

The Tzemach Tzedek (Orach Chayim, responsum 87) discusses the same question and expresses concern that the custom seems to be not to allow such construction. Nevertheless, he also allows for leniency under some conditions.

In our times, building contractors and subcontractors generally hire day-workers to perform the actual work. Therefore, according to the Alter Rebbe’s opinion in the main text, where he prohibits construction when the work is done by day-workers, such construction would be prohibited.
Thus it will look shameful that the non-Jews seemingly treat their sacred days with more respect than we treat ours. Although at present, the observance of sacred days by society at large is less prevalent, this concern still exists.
Moreover, the Jewish employer must not object to the non-Jew’s idleness, as stated in the following subsections.
In his Kuntreis Acharon (note 6), the Alter Rebbe explains that although, when quoting this law, the Shulchan Aruch of Rav Yosef Caro (Orach Chayim 244:5) also mentions a more stringent opinion, the Alter Rebbe did not think it necessary to mention the other view, because: a) we are speaking about a question of Rabbinic Law and, in such instances, the more lenient opinion is generally followed, and b) other authorities follow the more lenient view.

A marginal note attached to the Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Aruch states that, in his Mahadura Basra to sec. 243, the Alter Rebbe changed his mind concerning this matter and ruled that even when a non-Jew is hired for an entire year, and he must be involved in a specific task (such as writing) constantly and never remain idle, he is still considered as a contractor and is, hence, permitted to perform such tasks on Shabbos.
In such an instance, it would be forbidden for him to do so, as stated in sec. 252:5, because “perhaps others will suspect that [the Jew] instructed the non-Jew on Shabbos to perform the task. Alternatively, they may suspect that the non-Jew is a day-worker and not a contractor.”
For it is forbidden — even before Shabbos — to tell a non-Jew to perform work on Shabbos (see sec. 243:1). Only when the non-Jew performs the task on his own initiative is leniency granted (see sec. 325:20).
In that source, the Alter Rebbe gives the example of someone who is leaving on a trip immediately after Shabbos ends. Hence, if the work was not completed on Shabbos, it would be of no value to him.
A marginal note attached to the Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Aruch states that the rationale given here follows the understanding of Magen Avraham. Nevertheless, in his Mahadura Basra to sec. 243, the Alter Rebbe changed his approach to this matter and permitted benefit accrued to a Jew because of work a non-Jew performed on Shabbos in this situation.
So that he will not be reprimanded for his idleness.
There are authorities who maintain that even after the Alter Rebbe changed his opinion in his Mahadura Basra to sec. 243and permitted benefit accrued to a Jew because of work a non-Jew performed on Shabbos, in this instance, it is necessary to instruct a non-Jew not to work on Shabbos. Since he is performing the task because the Jew objects to his idleness, he is still considered as working for the Jew.

The Tzemach Tzedek (Orach Chayim, responsum 32) does not accept that position. He maintains that the Alter Rebbe’s reversal of his position in the Mahadura Basra established the principle that as long as the non-Jew is working to earn his wage, he is considered as working for himself. Hence, even in the instance at hand, that principle is followed.
A marginal note attached to the Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Aruch notes that the rationale offered here follows the approach of Magen Avraham. As mentioned, in his Mahadura Basra to sec. 243, the Alter Rebbe adopted a different perspective on a non-Jew’s performance of work on Shabbos. Nevertheless, even according to that position, in this instance, the non-Jew is prohibited against performing forbidden labor on the Jew’s behalf. Since he is hired to perform any and all work his employer gives him and not merely one specific task, he is considered as a hired worker and not as a contractor.
See sec. 305:31, where the Alter Rebbe grants permission for workers hired on a long-term basis to milk cows. In his Kuntreis Acharon to sec. 252 (note 6), he explains the rationale: so that they will prevent the animals from suffering discomfort. Nevertheless, he states that the workers who milk the cows should be contractors and not hired laborers.

See also sec. 305:34, where the Alter Rebbe rules leniently regarding workers hired on a long-term basis who perform work for the benefit of their Jewish employer on their own initiative. According to the Alter Rebbe’s position in his Shulchan Aruch, however, with the exception of special instances, this license does not apply when the non-Jew performs these labors using utensils belonging to a Jew. According to the Alter Rebbe’s position in his Mahadura Basra to sec. 243, the leniency applies even in such instances.
In sec. 243:3, the Alter Rebbe explains that since the non-Jew receives no actual benefit for his work, it appears that his activity is being carried out for the sake of the Jewish employer alone.
In that source, the Alter Rebbe states that a non-Jew need not be admonished for putting out a fire, for he is making the decision to try to extinguish the fire on his own initiative in the expectation of future gain. In his Mahadura Basra to sec. 243, he expands this leniency to other tasks that a non-Jew performs on his own initiative, provided the Jew does not benefit on Shabbos from those tasks.
In that source, the Alter Rebbe states that one may send a letter with a non-Jewish worker on Wednesday or Thursday. In addition to the lenient view mentioned here, there are further grounds for leniency, because there are authorities who do not at all forbid sending letters with non-Jewish workers on those days.
I.e., the government charged a fee for bringing certain articles into the country and sold the right to collect that fee to a private individual, in this instance, a Jew.
Were the food to have been brought from beyond the town’s Shabbos limits, it would have been forbidden, lest one instruct a non-Jew to bring an object from beyond those limits (sec. 325:11).
Which is forbidden on that Shabbos, as stated in sec. 310:3.
Yeshayahu 13:13.
As explained in that section, our Sages interpreted this charge as forbidding occupation with one’s ordinary mundane concerns even when forbidden labor is not involved.
I.e., there are two dimensions of the prohibition of the non-Jew working for the Jew: a) that he is considered the Jew’s agent; that is resolved by hiring him as a contractor; and b) that the Jew is instructing him to perform the labor on Shabbos; that is resolved because — as the Alter Rebbe proceeds to state — the prohibition involved here is only a shvus, and a loss is involved.

The Jewish employer must, however, give the non-Jew instructions during the week. He may not give any instructions on Shabbos itself. See the Kuntreis Acharon to sec. 263 (note 8).
Activities that are not Scripturally forbidden labors, but rather activities forbidden by Rabbinic decree because they resemble the forbidden labors or lest they lead one to commit a forbidden labor (Rambam, Hilchos Shabbos 21:1).
I.e., an activity which is forbidden due to the coupling of two Rabbinic safeguards. To refer to the instance here: the subsection is speaking about activities that do not involve the performance of forbidden labor, only the violation of a Rabbinic decree. Moreover, the Jew is not performing these activities himself, he is only instructing a non-Jew, and giving such instructions is forbidden only by Rabbinic decree.
I.e., the non-Jews who are obligated to pay the customs duty.
These sections are not extant in the Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Aruch. See the Shulchan Aruch of Rav Yosef Caro, Yoreh Deah, sec.149:3, and Sifsei Kohen 149:7, which grant permission to collect a debt from a non-Jew on one of their festivals, even though generally it is forbidden to do business with them on those days. See also the Shulchan Aruch of Rav Yosef Caro (Yoreh Deah, sec. 372:1), which grants a kohen permission to enter the Diaspora, where he would contract ritual impurity according to Rabbinic Law, so that he could save property from a non-Jew. Nevertheless, as stated above, although leniency is granted to enable the Jew to have the customs duty collected for this reason, the leniency is granted only when the non-Jew is hired as a contractor, not as a hired worker.
I.e., our worry is not that he will decide to write on Shabbos, but that he will decide to try to operate the concern without writing, and — once he is involved — forget and write. See footnote 60.
Since the non-Jew only works in the concern as a contractor on Shabbos, it is possible that such an impression may arise.
In his Kuntreis Acharon (note 7), the Alter Rebbe emphasizes that this serves as the rationale for the leniency. It is not because of our worry that, were leniency not be granted, a person’s concern for his money could possibly lead him to violate a more serious prohibition.
As is usually necessary, so that the payment for Shabbos is not distinct, but rather combined with that of the other days.
See sec. 243:11-12.
I.e., in contrast to the bathhouse, there is no entity that the Jew owns from which he is deriving benefit on Shabbos. Instead, he is selling a privilege to the non-Jew and that privilege belongs to the non-Jew entirely. The Jew no longer has any share in it.
Forthe merchandise does not belong to him on Shabbos.
In previous eras, it was common for the king of a country to contract out the minting of coins. The king would provide the metal for the coins and the contractor would provide the plates and the workers. In return, he was allowed to keep a certain percentage of the coins as payment. The workers were paid by the king and would therefore work on Shabbos. Thus, if the Jew did not subcontract the right to mint out to a non-Jewish contractor, he would not be permitted to keep any profit from the work performed on Shabbos.
As stated in sec. 252:15, even when there is no prohibition involved in the performance of a particular task on Shabbos, the performance of a task that causes noise is usually forbidden because the matter will become public knowledge.
Although the concern has been rented out to the non-Jewish operator, he may desire that the Jewish proprietor be present to give him advice on how to run it. Similarly, as the Alter Rebbe states, the Jewish proprietor may desire to be present to guard against theft or other undesirable practices. Nevertheless, it is forbidden for the Jew to actually stand next to the non-Jew, because then it will appear as though the non-Jew is his agent.
Or when there is a pressing need; see sec. 252:15.
As stated in subsection 14 above.

In his Kuntreis Acharon (note 8), the Alter Rebbe explains that Turei Zahav 244:7 states that it is permitted for a Jew to watch over the non-Jew even when a substantial loss is not involved. The Alter Rebbe states that even though, fundamentally, the halachah follows the Turei Zahav, since there are authorities who rule more stringently and forbid a Jew from sitting to watch, a substantial loss must be involved.
This activity is forbidden as a decree lest one be motivated to write (sec. 307:13).
As mentioned in subsection 12 above, this is forbidden as part of the prohibition against conducting one’s ordinary, mundane concerns on Shabbos. See also sec. 307:13.
This refers to a Jew who has leased the right to mint a king’s coins. (See Hagaos Maimonios 6:30, quoted in Magen Avrahom 244:19.)
I.e., the Jewish financier functioned as an investor, providing the non-Jew with financial resources in exchange for a share of the profits.
Even if some know of the Jew’s activity, it is not forbidden, because no decrees were imposed on entities detached from the ground, as stated in subsection 2.
In his responsa (Orach Chayim, responsa 33 and 88), the Tzemach Tzedek addresses a similar case and questions whether it is permissible to pay the worker money. He concludes that the Jewish owner should give the non-Jew the option of being paid in produce or being paid the value of that produce (or in the case at hand, the value of the salt).
I.e., they will produce more salt and thus earn more money.
As mentioned in subsection 10, the Jewish proprietor is required to inform them that they are not required to work on Shabbos. Otherwise, he will be considered as profiting from their work on Shabbos.

In his Kuntreis Acharon (note 9), the Alter Rebbeexplains why it is not necessary to admonish the non-Jews and prevent them from working on Shabbos, as some authorities require.

The above is in accordance with the Alter Rebbe’s approach in his Shulchan Aruch, which forbids profiting from work performed by a non-Jew on Shabbos. According to his approach in his Mahadura Basra to sec. 243, there is no difficulty in accepting such profits. As such, there is no obligation to inform the non-Jewish workers that they need not work on Shabbos.
Since the Jewish proprietor hired non-Jewish workers to work with the utensils directly after purchasing them, they never became identified with him. See a similar situation in sec. 243:15.
See Moed Kattan 12a. In his Kuntreis Acharon (note 10), the Alter Rebbe emphasizes two general principles reflected in his ruling in the main text:

a) a Jew must give a non-Jewish contractor all the materials necessary for performing the task for which he was contracted before Shabbos; and

b) the non-Jew must remove those materials from the Jew’s domain before Shabbos, because of the prohibition of maris ayin.
I.e., it is public knowledge that the work is being performed in premises belonging to the Jewish proprietor.
See subsections 12-17.
As opposed to the salt merchant who is only forfeiting the possibility of earning something which is not yet his.
For he does not want them to work on Shabbos.
In the instance at hand, by contrast, closing his enterprise on Shabbos will not cause him a loss. It will only prevent him from gaining additional profits.
There it is explained that there is no prohibition in such a situation, because the work of the non-Jews will not be observed by Jews on Shabbos.
See also subsection 20 above.
סעיף ד.
משנה שבת יז, ב. ירושלמי פ"א ה"ח. שו"ע ס"א. טור ושו”ע סי' רנב ס"ב. לקמן שם ס"ד.
רמב"ם פ"ו הי"ב. סה"ת סי' רכב. ב"י סי' רנב סוד"ה ומ"ש כתב הרוקח. וכדלקמן סי' רנב ס"ט, שדוקא בפניו ולא קצץ יש חילוק בין שלו לשל ישראל. וראה גם לקמן סי' רעו ס"ג.
רמב"ם פ"ו הי"ב. שו"ע ס"א. וכדלקמן בסוף הסעיף.
ב"י ד"ה ולענין היתר. וראה גם לקמן סי"ב.
משנה שם (דף כב). טור ושו”ע שם.
סעיף ד.
מבואר יותר לקמן ס"ט: ואף אם המלאכה צריכה לו במוצאי שבת מיד מכל מקום אין זה נקרא ריוח אלא הנאה בעלמא. ומבואר בקו"א ס"ק א שלמד זאת ממשמעות המ"א סי' רמז סוף ס"ק ב, וט"ז סי' שז ס"ק ג. וראה לקמן סי' רנב ס"ה באיזה אופן אפשר דאסור.
שו"ע ס"א.
מ"א סי' רנב ס"ק יא. תוספת שבת סק"ב. וראה ריטב"א ע"ז כא, ב ד"ה הרי אמרו. וראה גם לקמן סי' רנב ס"ד.
ב"י סי' רנב ד"ה ומה שהתנה.
דלעיל סי' רמג ס"ד. ההגדרה בשכיר יום כיון שלא קיבל המלאכה לגמור מבוארת לעיל שם קו"א ס"ק א. אמנם במהדו"ב ד"ה ושאני שכיר יום חזר בו מביאור זה, וביאר שתלוי אם כל יום מתחשב לבדו, עיי"ש בארוכה.
מו"ק יא, ב. ריטב"א שם.
ירושלמי שבת פ"א ה"ח. רמב"ם. מגיד משנה פ"ו הי"ב בשם הרשב"א. שו"ע ס"ה. וכדלקמן סי' רנב ס"ה.
כדלקמן סי' רמז ס"א וש"נ. וראה זכרון יוסף סי' צו.
תוס' שבת יט, א ד"ה אלא א"כ. רא"ש פ"א סי' לו. שו"ע ס"א. טור ושו"ע ורמ"א סי' רנב ס"ב. לקמן שם ס"ו. וראה מהדו"ב לסי' רמג ד"ה ומכל מקום וד"ה וה"נ ס"ל למהר"ם, שבירר דעת הפוסקים בזה.
ס"ד ואילך.
ירושלמי שבת פ"א ה"ח. הובא בתוס' יז, ב ד"ה אין נותנין עורות. ע"ז כא, ב ד"ה אריסא. רא"ש שם סי' כג. מ"מ פ"ו הי"ב.
תוס' שבת שם. ר"ן שבת שם ד"ה ובכולן. ב"י סי' רנב ד"ה ודע.
מו"ק יא, ב (בבית אחר).
ראה לקמן סי' רנב ס"ה ובקו"א שם ס"ק ה.
ר"י בתוס' ורא"ש שם. טור ומ"א ס"ק ד.
רמב"ם פ"ו הי"ד. שו"ע ס"א. ונתבאר לעיל סי' רמג ס"ח.
תוס' שבת שם. ר"ן שם ד"ה ובכולן. וראה קו"א סוף סק"ד.
רמב"ם פ"ו הי"ג-ד. מגמרא פ"ב דמו"ק יב, א. טור ושו"ע שם.
רמב"ם ושו"ע שם, לפירוש מ"א סק"ג. וראה לעיל סי' רמג קו"א ס"ק א.
מ"א סק"ד.
ראה חקרי הלכות ח"ג ע' טז, ב. יגד"ת (נ. י.) חל"ו ע' שז. חו' לח ע' מה.
תשובת (מהרי"ל) מהר"ם מרוטנבורג (פראג) סי תכז. רמ"א ס"א.
מ"א סק"ב. וראה קו"א ס"ק ב.
משמעות רבינו ירוחם נתיב יב חי"ב (פב, ב). ב"י סי' רנב ד"ה ודע (שכשעושה הנכרי בביתו מותר אף שנתפרסמה). אבל אם הוא בפרהסיא אסור אף אם מקצת יודעים (קו"א ריש ס"ק ב). ומטעם זה נאסרו החלוקים דלקמן סי' רנב ס"ח (קו"א ס"ק ג).
גמרא בפ"ב דמו"ק שם. ורמב"ם פ"ו הי"ד. טור ושו”ע ס"א. וראה כוננת מישרים ע' קח.
רמב"ן בספר תורת האדם (ענין אבילות, במלאכה כיצד, בסופו). רבינו ירוחם נתיב יב חי"ב (פב, ב). שו"ע ס"ד. סי' רנב ס"ג (שטוב להחמיר. ובמ"א סוף ס"ק י שאסור). לקמן סי' רנב ס"ח. וראה קו"א ס"ק ב.
רמב"ן שם. שו"ע ס"ד.
משמעות המ"א סי' רנב סק"י.
תשובת רשב"א ח"ה סי' ריא. הובא בב"י סי' רנב שם. שו"ע סי' תרסד ברמ"א סי"א. וראה קו"א ס"ק ב.
תוס' ספ"ק דע"ז כא, ב ד"ה אריסא. רא"ש שם סכ"ג. סמ"ג ל"ת סה. הגהות מיימוניות פ"ו הי"ד. טור ושו”ע ס"ב.
ראה אליה רבה סק"ו. מ”מ וציונים.
לבוש ס"ב.
אליה זוטא סק"ב. וראה קו"א סק"ד. ביאורי השולחן ע' קנב ואילך.
ב"ח ד"ה ואפי' סיתת העכו"ם. מ"א סק"י.
ב"ח ומ"א שם. ט"ז סוסק"ד. וראה תהלה לדוד סי' שכה ס"ק לז. ביאורי השולחן ע' קסב.
ר"ת בס' הישר שו"ת סי' ו. הובא בתוס' שבת יז, ב ד"ה אין נותנין. ע"ז שם. רא"ש שם ובטור.
ב"ח וט"ז שם. אבל ראה לקמן סי' שכה סוף סכ"א שנכון להחמיר אף בקבלנות.
ט"ז שם. מ"א ס"ק יא. וראה לקמן שם. קו"א לסי' רמג סק"ב. כוננת מישרים ע' קכ; קכו.
מ"א ס"ק יב.
רמ"א ס"ג.
מ"א סק"ח.
שו"ת תודת שלמים ח"ב (לחמי תודה) סוס"י ד.
ראה תהלה לדוד ס"ק ב.
סעיף י.
שו"ת תודת שלמים שם סי' ג (נט, א). וראה אמרי יושר ח"ב סי' קנז. תהלה לדוד ס"ק ד. הערות בשו"ע אדמוה"ז ע' 26. ביאורי השולחן ע' קסו.
באה"ט סק"ה. תוספת שבת סוסק"ז. וראה שו"ת שארית יהודה סוס"י ה, אם במקום שנתפרסם מותר אפילו שלא בביהכ"נ. וראה גם שו"ת צ"צ או"ח סי' פז בארוכה.
מ"א שם.
מ"א שם.
רמב"ם פ"ו הי"ב. טור ושו”ע ס"ה.
מ"א סקי"ד. הגה"ה על הגליון: עי' בקונטרס אחרון מהרב (מהדורא בתרא לסי' רמג ד"ה והשתא אתי שפיר) שחזר בו הרב, והשיג על המ"א גם בזה, דאזיל לטעמי' בסי' רמג, ומסכים דאם שכרו למלאכה מיוחדת אע"פ ששכרו לכתוב תמיד מותר עיי"ש כמבואר ברמב"ם שם הי"ד (רק שלא יקפיד עליו אם יבטל כמ"ש הט"ז סק"ה. וכדלקמן ס"י).
כדלעיל ס"א ולקמן סי' רנב ס"ד.
ב"י סד"ה ולענין שוכר. וכדלקמן סי' רנב ס"ה. אמנם ראה מהדו"ב שם ד"ה ומכל מקום וד"ה ומהאי טעמא, שאף בבית ישראל אין חוששים למראית העין בשכיר שנה שעושה מעצמו. וראה גם לקמן סי' רנב ס"י (בעושה מאליו).
כדלעיל ס"א וקו"א ס"ק א.
משמעות המ"א סק"א וצ"ע.
סעיף ה. קו"א שם ס"ק ו. ולעיל קו"א ס"ק א. וראה כוננת מישרים ע' קמא.
סעיף ג. וכבר נתבאר שם, כי במהדו"ב לסי' רמג חזר בו, ומסיק כהרמב"ם שם שאינו חושש לריוח של ישראל מעבודת הנכרי לעצמו.
ט"ז סק"ה. וראה ביאורי השולחן ע' קסז ואילך.
ראה מ”מ וציונים. כוננת מישרים ע' קמה.
ב"י ד"ה ולענין שוכר ובסו"ס רמז, בדעת הרמב"ם פ"ו הי"ב. רמ"א ס"ה.
מ"א ס"ק יד. ולפי מה שחזר בו במהדורא בתרא היינו אפילו שכרו לכתוב תמיד.
מ"א ס"ק טז. ולפי מה שחזר בו במהדורא בתרא, הטעם הוא לפי ששכיר שנה לכל המלאכות אינו נחשב כקבלן (ראה שם ד"ה אלא דבהא וד"ה וממוצא וד"ה וגם י"ל וד"ה וגם את"ל).
סעיף ג. הגה"ה על הגליון: טעם זה הוא לפי דעת המגן אברהם, ועיין בקונטרס אחרון מהרב (מהדורא בתרא לסי' רמג) טעם אחר, לפי מה שכתב שם לא כהמגן אברהם.
הגהות מרדכי סו"פ כל כתבי סי' תסב בשם רא"ם (אבל בס' יראים לא נמצא. וראה בהגהות מרדכי שם מסיים: ושלום העני מאיר. וכ"ה באגודה סי' קמו בשם ראבי"ה סי' רנז). וראה קו"א ס"ק א (במוסגר, ולקמן סי' רנב קו"א ס"ק ה ד"ה והאמת, במוסגר) שהביא כן גם מספר התרומה סי' רכב. ונתבאר בארוכה במהדו"ב לסי' רמג ד"ה והשתא אתי שפיר וד"ה וספר התרומה. וראה מ"מ וציונים. כוננת מישרים ע' קמח. העו"ב תתכה ע' 53 ואילך.
גם טעם זה הוא לפי דעת המ"א, ובמהדורא בתרא שם נתבאר הטעם דדמי לקצץ דמהני גם אם לא הוי כקבלן.
ראה לקמן סי' שה סל"א שהתיר בעבדו ושפחתו השכורים לו לשנה או לשנתיים לחלוב בשבת, והטעם נתבאר לקמן סי' רנב קו"א ס"ק ו. וראה לקמן סי' רעו ס"י וסי' שה סל"ד בעבדים ושפחות השכורים, שאם עושים מלאכה מעצמן אין צריך למחות בידם אלא כשעושים מלאכה בחפצים של ישראל (כדין נכרי העושה מלאכה מעצמו, דלקמן סי' רנב ס"י). ומבואר במהדו"ב לסי' רמג ד"ה והכי נמי, שיש להם דין העושה מעצמו בטובת הנאה (להשלים קבלנותו של שכירות שנה). וראה העו"ב שם.
כפירוש הב' בב"י ד"ה ולענין שוכר בדעת הגהות מרדכי בשם הרא"ם שם. אמנם ראה קו"א ס"ק א (במוסגר, ובסי' רנב קו"א ס"ק ה ד"ה והאמת, במוסגר) שהוכיח שלא רק בדליקה התיר הרא"ם. וראה העו"ב שם.
סעיף כו, בנכרי העושה מעצמו. וכ"ה ברשב"א (קכב, א סד"ה רבא) שדוקא בדליקה אמרו (קכא, א. לקמן סי' שלד סכ"ו) שאין צריך למחות בנכרי העושה מעצמו, משא"כ בשאר מלאכות. אמנם במהדורא בתרא לסי' רמג האריך בביאור דיעות הפוסקים בזה בנכרי העושה מעצמו, ומסיק שאין צריך למחות בידו (גם בשאר מלאכות) אלא כשהישראל נהנה בשבת מהמלאכה.
סעיף י.
ונתבאר הטעם לקמן סי' רנב קו"א ס"ק ז.
ישעי' נח, יג.
מ"א סק"כ. אליה רבה ס"ק יד. וראה גם לעיל סי' רמג ס"ג.
ראה שם ס"א וס"ד (גזירה שמא יכתוב). סי' שא קו"א ס"ק ב (הטעם שלפנינו מתוס' קיג, ב. ב' הטעמים ברש"י ביצה לז, א ד"ה משום מקח וממכר). וראה גם לקמן סי' רסג קו"א ס"ק ח ד"ה והענין הוא.
מרדכי פ"ק דשבת סי' רמו-ז בשם מהר"ם. שו"ע ס"ו.
כדלעיל ס"א. וטעם החילוק ביניהם (שזה נקרא זה שכיר יום וזה קבלנות), ראה לעיל סי' רמג קו"א סק"א ד"ה והא דהצריך. מהדו"ב שם ד"ה והנה לפי.
מרדכי שם. וראה זכרון יוסף סי' צד. מ”מ וציונים. אוצר השבת ע' רצב. משא"כ כשאינו קובע מלאכתו בשבת ונותן לו חלק בריוח מותר בכל אופן כדלקמן סי' רמה סט"ז.
ראה לקמן סי' רסג קו"א ס"ק ח ד"ה והענין הוא, טעם הדבר כיון שהם ב' איסורים נפרדים, ואף שהותרה האמירה מטעם מצוה עדיין הצריכו קבלנות שלא יהי' כשלוחו.
כדלעיל מטעם ממצוא חפצך.
סעיף יב. וראה קו"א ס"ק ז.
מ"א ס"ק יז, בביאור דברי המרדכי שם. וראה תהלה לדוד ס"ק ז.
ראה חקרי הלכות ח"ג יט, א. העו"ב תתלב ע' 60.
סעיף ג. ש"ך שם סק"ז. וראה כוננת מישרים ע' קנד.
סעיף א.
ב"י בביאור דברי המרדכי שם. הובא בט"ז סק"ו. מ"א שם. וראה לקמן סי' רסו קו"א ס"ק ב.
הגהות אשרי סופ"ק דע"ז סי' כד, בשם אור זרוע (ח"ב, פסקי ע"ז סי' קמב), בשם ר"ח בשם גאון (לגבי מטבע דלקמן. וראה תפארת יהודה קלמן ע' 187). רמ"א ס"ו.
ב"י סי' רמה ד"ה כתוב בהגהות אשרי. ורמ"א בהג"ה שם. וראה קו"א סק"ז. לקמן סכ"א. הערות בשו"ע אדמוה"ז ע' 27.
ט"ז סק"ו.
מ"א ס"ק יח.
כדלעיל סי' רמג סי"א-ב. וראה מ”מ וציונים. הערות בשו"ע אדמוה"ז ע' 28. יגד"ת (נ. י.) חו' לח ע' מג. כוננת מישרים ע' קסה.
מ"א שם. וראה צ"צ: פס"ד יא, ד. שו"ת או"ח סי' פט. סי' מט ס"ו. אבני נזר חו"מ סי' כה. ביאורי השולחן ע' קעח. כוננת מישרים ע' קסו.
הגהות אשרי שם. רמ"א שם.
מ"א שם.
ראה לקמן סי' רנב סט"ו.
רמ"א שם.
ראה לקמן סי"ט. מ"מ וציונים. ביאורי השולחן ע' קעט. קפ.
ט"ז סק"ז.
מרדכי פ"ק דשבת סי' רמז. רמ"א ס"ו.
מ"א סק"כ. וראה תהלה לדוד ס"ק י. כוננת מישרים ע' קעג; קעז.
ט"ז סק"ז (שהתיר גם בלי הפסד מרובה). וראה קו"א סק"ח.
כדלעיל סי"ד.
ט"ז שם בדעת המרדכי שם (והג"מ) [מהגמרא] ספ"ג דעירובין לח, ב. וכדלקמן סי' שו ס"א.
כדלעיל סי"ב מטעם ממצוא חפצך. וראה לקמן סי' שז סי"ג.
סעיף א.
הגהות מיימוניות פ"ו אות ל. מ"א ס"ק יט. וראה לעיל סוס"ב. כוננת מישרים ע' קעט.
תשובות רש"ל סי' ק. הובא במ"א ס"ק יז. וראה צ"צ או"ח סוס"י לג.
סעיף א.
משמעות רש"ל שם, דלא כשו"ת פנים מאירות ח"א סי' לח.
ראה קו"א ס"ק ט, דהיינו כדי לחוש לדברי הפנים מאירות שם, שסובר כדלעיל ס"ט-יא וסי' רמג ס"ג, שגם בשכיר שנה למלאכה מיוחדת אסור כשהישראל מקפיד על ביטולו. אבל ראה מה שצויין לעיל שם, שבמהדורא בתרא לסי' רמג (ד"ה והשתא אתי שפיר וד"ה אבל אם) חזר בו אפילו בשכיר שנה, ומסיק שלא איכפת לנו בזה אף שמקפיד עליו וגוער בו כו', וכ"ש כאן שיש להתיר גם מטעמים המבוארים בקו"א.
רש"ל שם. וכדלעיל סי' רמג סט"ו.
גמרא רפ"ב דמו"ק יב, א. ט"ז סק"ד. וראה שו"ת צ"צ או"ח סי' לא סעי' ב. פס"ד טו, ג.
סעיף ד-ה.
ראה הערות בשו"ע אדמוה"ז ע' 29.
ראה ביאורי השולחן ע' קפב.
שו"ת רש"ל שם (לגבי אילו היה גם כאן קובע לו מלאכתו בשבת, כדלעיל סי"ב). פנים מאירות שם (לגבי מקפיד על ביטולו ואיסור משתרשא ליה, שאסור לדעתו, כמבואר בקו"א ס"ק ט).
עי' תשובות פנים מאירות סי' לח (שלדעתו אסור בזה ובמלח, ולדידן מותר בשניהם, כמבואר בקו"א סק"ט).
סעיף טו (שלא נקרא שמו עליו, וכדלעיל ס"כ).
שגם בזה מיירי בשו"ת פנים מאירות שם.
Translated by Rabbi Eliyahu Touger and Sholom B Wineberg.
© Copyright, all rights reserved. If you enjoyed this article, we encourage you to distribute it further, provided that you comply with's copyright policy.
Start a Discussion
1000 characters remaining